The Works of James Buchanan 



This /ttttrpress edilion is /imi/eu/ to 
730 copies, of 7vhich this is 



No. 



The Works 



OF 



James Buchanan 



M 



Comprising his Speeches, State Papers, 
and Private Correspondence 



Collected and Edited 
By 

John Bassett Moore 




Philadelphia & London 

J. B. Lippincott Company 



1908 



.p-l 



LIbrtAKY of u 
l«r« 6«DMt Hat*«' 

APH 10 lyoo 

-• * J ^7 A J 
conr a. 



ComiGHT, 1908 
By 

|. U. l.H-flNCOTT CoMfA.NY 



Printed hy J. B. l.tpfiitcclt Compatf 
Tki H^athington Squart Prtit, Fii/aJftf>Ha, U. .V. j1. 



>D 



^^ 



EDITORIAL NOTE 



The publication of the works of Janies Buchanan, in the 
present comprehensive form, was assured by the action of the late 
Mrs. Henry E. Johnston, formerly Harriet Lane, who, toward 
the close of her interesting and well-spent life, determined to 
give this final proof of her devotion to her uncle's memory. To 
those who have read the excellent biography of Buchanan written 
by George Ticknor Curtis, and published by the Harpers in 1883, 
it is unnecessary to speak of the exceptional relation which sub- 
sisted between Buchanan and his niece, a relation characterized 
on the one side by perfect care and confidence, and on the other 
by a loyalty and veneration that never wavered. 

It was the fate of James Buchanan, in his seventieth year, 
when, at the close of a long and wearing public career, he was 
about to lay down the burdens of office, to be confronted 
with a crisis which would have taxed the energy and decision of 
an Andrew Jackson at thirty-five, and concerning the wisest treat- 
ment of which even the philosophers of hindsight cannot agree. 
There has no doubt existed a general tendency, which was 
stimulated by the eventual triumph of the Union and the abolition 
of slavery, to censure him for not having assumed a peremptory 
and defiant attitude toward secession when it first became 
aggressively active. But, even if it be admitted that this more 
heroic course might have been justified by the event, it seems 
unreasonable and unjust to condemn a statesman of Buchanan's 
age, political antecedents, and strict constitutionalism for seeking 
to afford the largest possible opportunity for conciliatory and 
healing measures. Efforts were repeatedly made, apparently in 
a spirit of hopefulness, by his successor as President, to find 
a basis of compromise ; and when the armed conflict began, the 
first actual shot was not fired by a soldier of the Union. 
Buchanan's course is explained and defended in his monograph 
entitled " Mr. Buchanan's Administration on the Eve of the 
Rebellion," which is reprinted in the last volume of the present 
publication. Much authentic matter on the same subject may 
also be found in the collected essays of the Honorable Horatio 



vi THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

King, published in 1895, under the title " Turning on the Light: 
A Dispassionate Sun^ey of President Buchanan's Administration, 
from i860 to its Close." I desire also to call attention to the 
able address, " Buchanan's Administration on the Eve of the 
Rebellion," delivered by the Honorable W. U. Hensel at Lan- 
caster, Pennsylvania, January 24, 1908. This paper has just 
come to my notice, and 1 shall seek Mr. Hensel's permission 
to reprint it in the last volume of the present publication. 
^ In the light of a restored national authority, with powers 

vastly strengthened not only by constitutional amendment but 
also by war and construction, it has grown more and more difficult 
to enter into the spirit of the refinements which found expression 
in Buchanan's annual message of December, i860, as to the legal 
aspects of secession and the powers of the Federal Government 
in the premises. On these questions, however, the message, 
contrary to what often seems to be supposed, advanced nothing 
new. The idea of a double or divided sovereignty, each part 
supreme within its sphere, was a commonplace of American 
political and juridical discussions, and was accepted as a sort of 
self-evident truth by the masses, till its practical impotence in the 
face of the attempt of a State to secede suddenly became glaringly 
manifest. Moreover, this part of the message was substantially 
but a transcript of an official opinion then lately given to the 
President by his Attorney-General, the Honorable Jeremiah S. 
Black, who appears to have volunteered the service and himself 
to have drawn up the questions which the President was to 
propound to him. 

When we review Buchanan's record as a public man, whether 
as a Representative in Congress or a Senator, as Secretary of 
State or Minister Plenipotentiary, or as President, there is 
nothing that impresses us more than his laborious industry and 
his capacity for business. He did not hold himself in reserve for 
great occasions. He gave his best from day to day, maintaining 
a uniformly high level of accomplishment. Where tact and 
diplomacy were requisite, he was especially successful. Di- 
plomacy was in reality his special gift. Both at St. Petersburg 
and at London, he cultivated good will and rendered substantial 
service. He was the first Secretarv of State to announce and 
maintain the doctrine of voluntary expatriation in its full extent. 
He also systematized the work of the Department of State. 

His personal integrity was beyond question. \w such matters 
he avoided even the appearance of evil. 



EDITORIAL NOTE vii 

The reader may observe that in some cases the only source 
cited for a paper of Buchanan's is Curtis' biography. In such 
cases I was unable to find the original document. Some years 
ago, before the Buchanan materials were placed in the Historical 
Society of Pennsylvania, those used by Curtis passed through 
a fire in a storage warehouse in New York, and some of them, 
doubtless, were destroyed. 

For aid in collecting materials, I desire to express my special 
obligations to Miss Wylie, of the Department of Manuscripts of 
the Historical Society of Pennsylvania; to my former student, 
Samuel B. Crandall, now connected with the Spanish Treaty 
Claims Commission ; and to my old friend, Worthington C. Ford, 
of the Division of Manuscripts of the Library of Congress, whose 
debtors we all are. I desire also to extend my thanks to my 
former student, Albert Marion Elsberg, for assistance in the 
revision of the synopsis of Buchanan's career in Congress. 

Lastly, I should be guilty of a grave omission if I failed to 
make my acknowledgments to James Buchanan Henry, Esquire, 
for constant interest and encouragement. His extensive and 
intimate acquaintance with men and affairs, gained partly as 
secretary to his uncle. President Buchanan, has always been at 
my disposal. 

John Bassett Moore. 

New York, April 6, 1908. 



CONTENTS of VOLUME I 



Synoptical Index to Buchanan's Career in Congress xv 

I813. PAGE 

To Jared Ingersoll, February 6 1 

Desires to be deputy attorney in Lebanon county. 

1815. 

Fourth of July Oration 2 

1821. 

To Judge Walter Franklin, December 21 9 

Comments on members of Congress — John Randolph — The Bankrupt Bill. 

1822. 

Speech on Indian Appropriations, January 9 11 

Resolution and Remarks on Militia Fines, January 24 20 

Speech on the Bankruptcy Bill, March 12 24 

Remarks on the Exchange of Stocks, March 21 43 

Remarks on the Exchange of Stocks, March 30 45 

Remarks on a Proposed Appropriation for the Repair of the Cumber- 
land Road, April 9 49 

Remarks on a Proposed Appropriation for Marking the Western 

Boundary, April 25 55 

1823. 

Speech on the New Tariff Bill, February 7 56 

Remarks on the Punishment of Crimes, February 10 70 

To John Sergeant, May 9 71 

Advises him against becoming a candidate for governor. 
1824. 

Remarks on Costs in Patent Cases, January 5 T2. 

Remarks on the Erection of the Washington Monument, January 15. 78 
Remarks on a Proposed Duty on Cotton Bagging, February 16, 17, 19. 

and 26 81 

Remarks on a Proposed Duty on Wheat, February 27 84 

Remarks on a Proposed Duty on Bar Iron, February 28 85 

Remarks on the Duty on Woollen Goods, March 4 89 

Remarks on a Motion to Reduce the Proposed Duty on Hemp, 

March 23 ^9 

ix 



X illE \\(>UKr5 Ol .lAMKS liL( liA.NAN 

Keuakks on a Motion to Extend the Drawback System, March 25.. 93 

SiEECH ON the Tariff Bill, April 9 gy 

Remarks on the Navigation ok Western Rivers, May 7. 8. 10. and 11. . 113 
Remarks on a Resolution Relating to the Sale of Lots in Washing- 
ton, May 13. (May 18, in the text, is an error.) 117 

Remarks on the Date of Adjournment, May 18 118 

Remarks on a Bill for Occupying the Mouth of the Columbia River, 

Di'ccmbtT 21 up 

1825. 
To Thomas Elder, January j ug 

Politics in Washington— Prospects of General Jackson in the approaching 

presidential election. 

Remarks on a Bill for the Relief of the Niagara Sufferers. Jan- 

u-iry 3 iji 

Remarks on the Bill for the Punishment of Certain Crimes Against 

THE United States, January 7 124 

Remarks on the Aptointment of a Committee tu Examine Monroe's 

Accounts, January 11 125 

Remarks on the Western National Road, January 13 127 

Remarks on the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal, January _'i 129 

To Thomas Elder, January 24 132 

Report that Kctitucky and Ohio would sup[>ort Adams. 

Remarks on the Election of President, February 2 133 

Remarks on Drawback Duties, February 21 136 

Remarks on the Bill for the Suppression of Piracy, Marcli i 136 

Remarks on the Sa.me Subject, Marcli i 137 

To General Jackson, May 29 138 

The late presidential election— Jackson's popularity in Pennsylvania— References 
to Richard Rush and John Sergeant. 

Fro.m Gk.nkkal J.\ck.son, June 25 139 

The l.itL- presidential election — Personal topics. 

Remarks on the Case of Commodore Porter, December 15 and 16 141 

Re.marks on Losses in the Collection of the Customs, December 27. . 145 

1826. 

Re-marks on the Judiciary System. January 5 146 

Speech on the Judiciary System, January 9 and 10 147 

Remarks on the Appropriations for Fortifications, January 27 167 

Rk.m arks on the Sa.me Suuject, January 30 171 

Re.marks on a Proposed Amendment to the Constitution in Relation 

TO the Election of President and \'ice- President, February 20 172 

To Genfjjal Jack.son. March 8 173 

Jackson's (lolitical strmnth in Pcnnsylvnni.1— The Panama Mission— Mctho<l of 
electing the President and Vlcc-rre»i<lent. 

Remarks on the Dismal Swamp Canal, March 11 174 

Remarks on Mr. Poinsett's Negotiations with Mexico, March 25.... 177 



CONTENTS OF VOLUME I xi 

Remarks on the Same Subject, March 27 I79 

Resolution on the Panama Mission, April 4 182 

From General Jackson, April 8 183 

Political sentiment of Pennsylvania— The Panama question- South America 
and entangling alliances. 

Speech on the Panama Mission, April 11 184 

Resolution and Remarks on the Panama Mission, April 18 and 20. .. 206 
Remarks on a Bill for the Relief of Revolutionary Officers, April 24. 211 
To General Jackson, September 21 216 

Politics in Pennsylvania — Mr. Cheves. 

From Duff Green, October 12 217 

Election of Adams— The alleged " bargain." 

From General Jackson, October 15 218 

Political support in Pennsylvania— Mr. Cheves— The crops. 

To Duff Green, October 16 218 

Election of Adams— The alleged "bargain." 

Remarks ON a Proposed Grant of Land to Certain Asylums for the 
Deaf and Dumb, December 11 220 

Resolution Calling for Information on the Panama Congress, De- 
cember 14 221 

1827. 
Remarks on the Importation of Brandy in Small Casks, January 3. . 221 

Remarks on the Appointment of Charges d'affaires, January 9 228 

Remarks on the Bill for the Relief of Revolutionary Officers, Janu- 
ary 12 • 229 

Remarks on the Duties on Wool and Woollens, January 18 233 

Remarks on the Same Subject, January 22 235 

From General J.\ckson, January 29 237 

Death of Buchanan's brother— The Panama question. 

Remarks on a Proposed Resolution of Inquiry as to the Indemnity 

FOR Slaves Carried Away, January 31 237 

Remarks on Memorials Relating to a Polar Expedition, February 6. . 238 

Remarks on the Duties on Wool and Woollens, February 7 239 

Remarks on the Controversy Between the United States and 

Georgia, February 9 243 

Remarks on the Duties on Wool and Woollens, February 10 246 

Remarks on Outfits for Diplomatic Officers, February 15 249 

Remarks on an Appropriation for the Cumberland Road, February 16. 252 

Remarks on Internal Improvements, February 20 252 

Remarks on an Appropriation for Furnishing the White House, 

February 23 ^55 

Remarks on the Repair of the Cumberland Road, February 24 256 

To Samuel D. Ingham, July 12 260 

Election of Adams—" Bargain and corruption." 

From General Jackson, July 15. ^ ^°^ 

Election of Adams— Jackson's statement—Letter of Mr. Beverly. 



\ii Till: \\( )|;k^ ( )i .1 wii;^ i;i ( ii w w 

To Dltf Gbken, July i6 262 

KIcctioii ol Atlamt — Political conditions in Penntylvania. 

To THE Editor of the Lancastfji Journal, August 8 263 

Election uf Adams—" Bargain and corruption "^<^ciieral Jackson'* 
addrcM to the public. 

ToSAM'f' !> 1m,ii AM, August 9 268 

Same sub)ect. 

To CJKNKRAL Jackson, August 10 269 

Same subject. 

From Dlff Green, August 11 270 

Same subject. 

To Duff Green, .\ugust 17 270 

Same subject. 

RE.MARKS ON THE PROTECTION OF Do.MESTIC MANUFACTURES, Dccembcr 3I . .71 

1828. 

I\K.MARKS AND MOTION IN RELATION TO THE CUMBERLAND RoAD, Janu- 
ary 14 274 

KE.MAKKS ON A RESOLUTION AS TO A CouRT Martial AT MoBiLE, Janu- 
ary 16 275 

Re.marks ON Retrenchment, January 23 277 

Remarks on Retrenchment, January 24 280 

Re.marks on Retrenchment, January 26 283 

Speech on Retrench ment, February 4 286 

Remarks on the Printing of Documents Relating to a Court Martial 

AT Mobile, February 11 312 

Remarks on Internal I.mi'Rove.ments, February 14 313 

Re.marks on the Use of the Hall of the House, March i 314 

Re.marks on Meade's Clai.m, March 24 316 

Re.marks on the Duties on Woollens, March 27 318 

Re.marks on the Same Subject, March 28 320 

Re.marks on the Sale of Certain Public Lands, March 31 . . . 329 

Si-KECH ON THE Tarifk Rii.l, .Xpril I and 2 330 

Re.marks on the Duty on Distilled Spirits, .Vpril 8 361 

.\mendment Relating to the Duties on \Vcx^)Llens, April 9 362 

Remarks on the Duty on Molasses, April 15 362 

Remarks on Mr. Rarijour's Explanation, Ai)ril 10 363 

Remarks on .\ Hill to .Vuthori/.e Railroad Co.Mr-ANiEs to I.mi'«)RT Iron 

AND Machinery Free of Duty, .Xpril 28 363 

Remarks on the Date of .Adjourn. ment, April 30 364 

Remarks on the Naturalization Laws, May i 365 

Re.marks on the Office of Major General, May 14 367 

Address on the Establishment of Common Sch(X)LS, June 370 

Remarks on the Extension of the Term of Exportations with Rene- 

EiT OK Drawback. December 11 380 

Remarks on the Bill for tue Occupation of the Oregon River, De- 
cember 2,\ 382 



CONTENTS OF VOLUME I xiii 

1829. 

Amendment to the Cumberland Road Bill, January 15 382 

Speech on the Cumberland Road, January 19 383 

Remarks on the Proposed Territory of Huron, January 20 396 

Remarks on a Proposed Amendment to the Constitution to Render 

the President Ineligible for a Second Term, February 6 397 

Speech on the Cumberland Road, February 12 398 

Remarks on the Cumberland Road, March 2 418 

Remarks on the Election of a Clerk of the House, December 7 418 

Remarks on the Appointment of Standing Committees, December g. . 419 
Remarks on the Printing of the Annual Report of the Secretary of 

the Treasury, December 15 420 

Remarks on the Distribution of the Proceeds of the Sale of Public 

Lands, December 30 421 

1830. 

Report on the Case of James Linsey, January 4 425 

Report on Allowances to Jurors, January 4 425 

Report on Appeals and Writs of Error, January 4 426 

Report on the Case of Manuel del Barco, January 4 427 

Report on the Lobster Fishery, January 13 428 

Speech on the Judiciary, January 14 429 

Remarks on Diplomatic Expenses, February 10 450 



SYNOPSIS of BUCHANAN'S CAREER 

IN CONGRESS 



HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 1821. 

December 3, 1821.— First appears as a member of the House of Repre- 
sentatives from Pennsylvania. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, I. 513.) 

December 5. — Appointed a member of the Committee on Agriculture. 
(Ann. 17 C. I s. 1821-1822, I. 519.) 

December 15.— On Buchanan's motion, the Committee on Roads and 
Canals are instructed to inquire whether, and, if any, what, measures should 
be adopted by the United States in aid of the Chesapeake and Delaware 
Canal Company. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, I. 549.) 

December 19. — Votes aye on a motion indefinitely to postpone a resolu- 
tion directing the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House to 
adjourn their respective houses from Saturday, December 22, till Wednesday, 
January 2, 1822. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, I. 564, 566, 567.) 

Takes part in the discussion of a proposal to increase the liabilities of 
pension agents. (Id. 572-573.) 

December 21. — The House having discussed, in Committee of the 
Whole, a report on the petition of David Taylor for an indemnity for 
staves used by General Wilkinson as fuel for the army when he embarked 
at Gravelly Point, New York, to proceed down the St. Lawrence River, the 
Committee, on Buchanan's motion, rises, in order that further time may 
be given for reflection upon the general principles involved in the case. 
(Ann. 17 C. I s. 1821-1822, I. 583.) 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES (Continued), 1822. 

January 3, 1822. — Remarks on the Military Appropriation Bill. (Ann. 
17 C. I s. 1821-1822, I. 630.) 

* January 9. — Speech on an appropriation to meet a deficiency in connec- ^ 
tion with Indian affairs. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, I. 682-690.) 

January 11. — Remarks against postponing the further consideration of 
the bill making partial appropriations for the support of the army. (Ann. 
17 C. I s. 1821-1822, I. 704.) 

'* January 24. — Offers and makes remarks upon a resolution of inquiry 
concerning the collection of fines imposed by United States courts-martial 
on militiamen in Pennsylvania for delinquencies during the War of 1812. 
Resolution adopted, and Buchanan appointed chairman of a committee of 
five to inquire and report thereunder. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, I. 787-789.) 

January 28. — Votes nay on a proposed amendment to the Apportionment 
Bill under the fourth census. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, I. 824.) 

January 29. — Opposes a motion to lay on the table the message of 
President Monroe, of January 28, 1822, in relation to the case of General 
Jackson and Judge Fromentin. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, I. 827.) 



Ann.=Annals of Congress. — C.=Congress. — s.=session. — *=Printed herein. 

XV 



xvi I'm: WOIIKS OF JAMKS Hr( "IIAXAX 

January 30.— On consideration of the Apportionment Bill, a motion to 
adopt 45.000 as the basis of reprebentatiun was lost, Uuchanan voting aye. 
A motion to adopt 39,000 was also lost, Buchanan voting no. (Ann. 17 C. 
I s. 18JI-1822, I. 843, 846.) 

January 31.— On consideration of the Apportionment Bill, a motion to 
make the ratio of representation 41,000 was lost, Buchanan voting aye. A 
motion to make the number 38,000 was also lost, Buchanan voting no. (Ann. 
17 C. I s. i«-'i-i822. I. 863, 805 J 

February i. — The Apportionment Bill being again under consideration, 
the motion to insert 41,500 was lost, Buchanan voting yea. A motion to 
strike out 40,000 was lost, Buchanan voting nay. (.\nn. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, 
I. 872. 874. 875.) 

I-i-bruary 2. — A motion to recommit the Apportionment Bill to a select 
committee, with instructions to strike out 40,000 and insert 42,000, was 
decided in the negative, Buchanan voting nay. A motion to recommit with 
instructions to insert 38,000 was lost, Buchanan voting nay. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 
1821-1822, I. 890.) 

I-cbruary 4. — Participates in a discussion on an amendment to the 
Apportionment Bill. The motion to amend was lost, Buchanan voting nay. 
A niution to reconnnit by inserting 3y,<joo instead of 42,000 was lost. 
Buchanan voting nay. (Ann. 17 C. I s. 1821-1822, I. 905, 906, 907.) 

February 6. — A proposal to insert 42,000 in the Apportionment Bill as 
the ratio of representation was lost, Bi'chanan voting in the negative. A 
proposal to make it 44,000 was also negatived, Buchanan voting nay. (.\nn. 
17 C. I s. 1821-1822, I. 925, 938.) 

The bill was passed, Buchanan voting yea. (Id. 947.) 

February 14. — Appointed a member of a committee to investigate the 
Post Office Department. (.Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, I. 1034.) 

February 21. — Participates in the discussion on the question of concurring 
with the Committee of the Whole in their amendments to the bill making 
appropriations for the military service of the United States for the year 
1822. (Ann. 17 C. I s. 1821-1822, I. 1129-1130.) 

February 28. — Remarks on a motion to lay on the table the resolution 
to refer various parts of the documents accompanying the President's message, 
in relation to .Andrew Jackson's transactions in Florida, to the Committee 
on Foreign Relations, the Committee on the Judiciary, and the Committee on 
Military AtTairs. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, I. I162.) 

March i. — The .Apportionment Bill l)eing under consideration, an amend- 
ment providing that, in ascertaining the population of .Alabama, no account 
should be taken of any enumeration made after March 3, 1822, was lost. 
Buchanan voting aye. Other motions also were made, on which Buchanan 
voted. (Ann. 17 C i s. 1821-1822, I. 1 169-1 171.) 

March 2. — Votes in the afTirmativc on the question of concurring in the 
amendment of the Conunittce of the Whole to the bill making appropriations 
for the supi)ort of the military establishment, in specifying the sum of $982,917 
for the pay and subsistence of the army. (Ann. 17 C. I s. 1821-1822, I. 1182.) 

March 4. — Votes aye on the passage of the Military .Appropriation Bill. 
(Ann. 17 C. I s. 1821-1822, I. 1193) 

March 7. — Participates in a discussion on a resolution relating to allow- 
ances which had lieen made to the .Attorney-Ceneral, in addition tti his salary. 
(Ann. 17 C. I s. 1821-1822. I. 1235.) 

March 11. — Calls for the consideration of the joint resolution from the 
Senate, to fix the first Monday in .April f<ir the adjournment of the session. 
(Ann. 17 C. I s. 1821-1822. II. 1250.) 

Aim. Annahof Con|tT«W.— C. -ConifrcN,. ^. session.—* Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: HOUSE, 1822 xvii 

March 12. — Votes against an amendment to the Bankruptcy Bill, ad- 
mitting others than merchants to the benefits of the law. The amendment was 
lost. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, II. 1276.) 

Votes for an amendment that no certificate of discharge shall be operative 
except as to persons liable to become bankrupts under the act. (Id. 1277.) 

Votes against a motion to amend the bill so as to admit all classes of the 
community to its provisions. (Id. 1281.) 

* Delivers a speech on the bill. (Id. 1281-1297.) 

On a vote taken on the main question, the Bankruptcy Bill was rejected, 
Buchanan voting nay. (Id. 1298.) 

March 13. — Remarks in favor of an amendment of the Rules of the 
House, relative to adjournment. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, II. 1302.) 

March 14. — Remarks in favor of an amendment to the bill authorizing the 
Secretary of the Treasury to pay ofif certain United States stocks. (Ann. 17 
C. I s. 1821-1822, II. 1305-) 

March 18. — Remarks on the contested election of Mr. Reed and Mr. 
Causden. Votes against concurrence with the Committee of the Whole, in 
their amendment of the second resolution, denying the right of General 
Reed to the seat he claimed. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822. II. 1311, 1312.) 

March 19. — Votes against a motion to amend the resolution concerning 
the contested election of Messrs. Causden and Reed, as amended in Committee 
of the Whole, so as to make it declare that, as both had an equal number of 
votes. Reed was not entitled to a seat. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, II. 1322.) 

Votes in favor of a resolution that Philip Reed is entitled to a seat 
in the House. The resolution was carried. (Id. 1323-) 

* March 21. — Speaks and votes in the affirmative on an amendment to the 
Exchange of Stocks Bill, to extend a part of the public debt at a lower rate 
of interest. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, II. 1344, I345-) 

March 26.— Votes aye on the passage of the Revolutionary Pension Bill. 
(Ann. 17 C. I s. 1821-1822, II. 1371-) 

March 28. — Votes in favor of the resolution reported by the Committee 
on Foreign Relations, recommending the recognition of the independence of 
the South American provinces and making an appropriation to carry it into 
efifect. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, II. 1403) 

* March 30.— Speaks and votes aye on the passage of the bill authorizing 
the exchange of certain stocks. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, II. 1429-1432, 

1442-) 

April I. — Votes aye on the adoption of the motion to reconsider the vote 
taken March 30th, by which permission was refused to Mr. Garnett, of 
Virginia, to spread upon the journals his reasons for voting against the 
resolutions to recognize the independence of the South American provinces. 
(Ann. 17 C. I s. 1821-1822, II. 1448.) 

* April 9.— Speaks and votes in favor of concurring with the Committee 
of the Whole in striking out the appropriation for the repair of the Cumber- 
land Road. (Ann. 17 C i s. 1821-1822, II. 1503-1508, 1514.) 

April 13. — Votes for a motion to discharge the Committee of the Whole 
from the further consideration of certain resolutions proposing an alteration 
in the tarifif laws. Votes against postponing the further consideration of 
these resolutions. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, II. 1547, 1548.) 

Participates in the discussion on a bill to compensate officers and 
volunteers in the Seminole campaign for horses lost in that service. (Id. 
1549.) 

April 15. — Votes in favor of engrossing and ordering for a third reading 
the foregoing bill. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, H. 1564.) 



Ann.=Annals of Congress.— C.=Coiigress.—s.=session.—*= Printed herein. 



xviii TIIK WOIUCS OF JAMES BUrilAXAX 

April 22. — Lays before the House a resolution of the General Assembly 
of Pennsylvania, requesting that the fines imposed on the militia of that 
State for non-compliance with certain requisitions of the President of the 
United States in tiie late war with Great Britain be transferred to that 
State, with power to collect them. The resolution was referred to the 
select committee appointed by the House on the subject. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 
1821-1822, n. 1627.) 

April 23. — Votes against the passage of the bill to repeal the act to 
encourage vaccination. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, H. 1640.) 

April 24. — Votes aye on the passage of the amendment to the bill 
concerning the compensation of members of Congress, so as to reduce the 
allowance for mileage to six dollars for every thirty miles travelled. (Ann. 
17 C. I s. 1821-1822, n. 1652.) 

Votes against a motion to recommit the Compensation Bill with certain 
instructions. (Id. 1653.) 

Votes for an amendment to provide that the reduction of mileage allow- 
ance, in the Compensation Bill, should take effect the first day of the past 
July. The amendment was lost. (Id. 1653.) 

Votes against an amendment to the Compensation Bill, to postpone its 
operation till the following July. The amendment was agreed to. (Id. 1654.) 

* April 25. — Remarks on a proposed appropriation for marking the 
western boundary of the United States under the treaty with Spain of 
February 22, 1819. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, II. 1663.) 

Report from the select committee, of which Buchanan was a member, on 
the subject of fines imposed by courts-martial on Pennsylvania militiamen. 
(House Report 97, 17 C. i s.) 

April 26. — Votes against an amendment to the Cumberland Road Bill, to 
provide for the cession to Maryland, Virginia, and Pennsylvania, respectively, 
of the road from Cumberland to Wheeling; the amendment was lost. Votes 
in favor of the amendment appropriating $9,000 for the repair of the road ; 
the amendment was adopted. Votes in favor of engrossing and reading the 
bill a third time; it was so ordered. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, II. 1691, 
1692.) 

Opposes an amendment to the Military Appropriation Bill for 1822, pro- 
viding that the payment of the expense incurred by the military courts- 
martial in Pennsylvania be made out of the moneys collected from military 
fines in that State. (Id. 1693.) 

April 27. — Votes against the motion to postpone the consideration of 
the bill as to compensation of members of Congress. Votes against an amend- 
ment to the motion to rcconmiit the bill with instructions to strike out four 
dollars and insert six in the allowance to members for their attendance and 
for their necessary travel of every twenty miles to and from Washington. 
The amendment was lost. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1S22, II. 1720, 1722.) 

April 29. — Votes aye on the passage of the bill for the preservation and 
repair of the Cumberland Road. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822. II. 1734) 

April 30. — Casts various votes on amendments to the bill providing for 
the compensation of members of Congress. (Ann. 17 C. i s. 1821-1822, II. 
1758, 1760. 1 761. 1762, 1776.) 

May 2.— Votes on a (luestion relating to the payment of the expenses 
incurred by courts-martial in the State of New York. (Ann. 17 C. I s. 1821- 

1822, II. 1780.) 

December 16.— Appears as a member of the House of Representatives 
from Pennsylvania. (Ann. 17 C. 2 s. 1822-1823, 384 ) 



Ann. Annals of Congress.— C. Congress.— s. session.— • Prinlcd herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: HOUSE, 1823 xlx 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES (Continued), 1823. 

January 8, 1823.— Votes against engrossing for a third reading the bill 
to incorporate the Naval Fraternal Association. The bill was rejected. 
(Ann. 17 C. 2 s. 1823-1824, 542.) 

January 9.— Votes in favor of engrossing and reading a third time the 
bill to appropriate land to defray the cost of laying out and making a road 
from a point on Lake Erie to the Connecticut Reserve. (Ann. 17 C. 2 s. 
1 823-1 824, 553.) 

January I4._— Votes against a motion to lay on the table the bill to pro- 
vide for procuring the necessary surveys and estimates for certain roads and 
canals. (Ann. 17 C. 2 s. 1823-1824, 625.) 

January 16.— Votes in favor of engrossing and reading for a third time 
the bill for the better organization of the United States District Court in 
Louisiana. (Ann. 17 C. 2 s. 1823-1824, 635.) 

January 23.— Proposes some additional sections to the bill providing for 
the preservation and repair of the Cumberland Road, and moves that the 
Committee of the Whole rise. (Ann. 17 C. 2 s. 1823-1824, 669.) 

Participates in a debate on the bill regulating the duties on imports and 
tonnage in United States ports. (Id. 670.) 

January 25. — Speaks and votes against a motion to amend the bill for the 
better organization of the United States District Court in Louisiana, by 
striking out an additional compensation of $500 for the district judge. The 
amendment was adopted. (Ann. 17 C. 2 s. 1822-1823, 690, 691.) 

January 27. — Votes against a motion to take up for consideration a bill 
to provide for the occupation of the mouth of the Columbia River. (Ann. 
17 C. 2 s. 1822-1823, 700.) 

Votes in favor of taking up for consideration the bill providing for 
surveys and estimates for certain roads and canals. (Id. 700.) 

January 29. — Votes against a motion to resume the consideration of the 
bill providing for surveys and estimates for certain roads and canals. (Ann. 
17 C. 2 s. 1822-1823, 725.) 

*■ February 7. — Speech on the new Tariff Bill. (Ann. 17 C. 2 s. 1822- 
1823, 893-905.) 

* February 10. — Introduces a resolution, and makes remarks thereon, 
instructing the Judiciary Committee to make inquiry regarding the punish- 
ment of crimes on the high seas. (Ann. 17 C. 2 s. 1822-1823, 929.) 

February 13. — Discusses an amendment to the General Appropriation 
Bill for 1823, making provision for the repair and preservation of the 
Cumberland Road, and moves and speaks upon an amendment to provide for 
the recession to Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia of those parts of 
the road lying within their respective jurisdictions. (Ann. 17 C. 2 s. 1822- 
1823, 1014.) 

February 14. — Speaks and votes aye on a motion to discharge the Com- 
mittee of the Whole from further consideration of the new Tariff Bill. 
(Ann. 17 C. 2 s. 1822-1823, 1016.) 

February 19. — Votes against the passage of the bill to extend the charter 
of the Mechanics' Bank of Alexandria. (Ann. 17 C. 2 s. 1S22-1823, 1062.) 

In Committee of the Whole, speaks in favor of his amendment to the 
Cumberland Road Bill, to provide for the recession to Maryland, Pennsyl- 
vania, and Virginia of certain parts of the Cumberland Road. The amend- 
ment was negatived. (Id. 1063.) 

In the House, again submits the amendment. (Id. 1063-1064.) 
Februarv 21. — Votes in favor of his amendment to the Cumberland 



Aiin.=AnnaIs of Congress. — C.=Congress.— s.=.session.— *=Printed herein. 



XX nil: WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

Road Rill. The amendment was negatived. (Ann. 17 C. 2 s. 1822-1823, 
1072.) 

Votes against a motion ordering the bill to a third reading. (Id. 1074) 

1-cbruary 24. — Votes in favor of ordering to be engrossed and read a 
third time the Ijill abolisiiing the office of measurer in the several ports of 
entry in the United States. (Ann. 17 C. 2 s. 1822-1823, 1093.) 

February 26. — Opposes a bill for the relief of Benjamin King. (Ann. 
17 C. 2 s. 1822-1823, 1 1 18.) 

February 27. — Votes against concurrence in the Senate amendment to 
the Revolutionary Pensions Bill, providing for a reduction of pensions. The 
amendment was not accepted. (Ann. 17 C. 2 s. 1822-1823, 1142.) 

February 28. — Votes for a resolution requesting the President to negotiate 
with the maritime powers for the abolition of the African slave trade. 
(Ann. 17 C. 2 s. 1822-1823. II5S-) 

December i. — Appears as a member of the House of Representatives 
from Pennsylvania, and takes his seat. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824, I. 793) 

December 2. — Appointed a member of the Committee on the Judiciary. 

(Ann. 18 C. I s. 1823-1824. I- 798.) 

December 5. — Appointed a member of a select committee of seven for the 
purpose of inquiring into the expediency of recommending to the several 
States the propriety of an amendment to the Constitution of the United 
States, making the mode of electing members of the House and electors 
uniform throughout the United States. (Ann. 18 C i s. 1823-1824. I. 801.) 

December 30. — Remarks on a bill for the relief of certain distillers of 
Berks County, Pennsylvania. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824, I. 910.) 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES (Continued), 1824. 

* January 5, 1824. — Remarks on a bill concerning costs in patent cases. 
(Ann. 18 C. I s. 1823-1824, I. 933-934. 936-937) 

January 6. — Reports from the Committee on the Judiciary a bill to alter 
the judicial districts of Pennsylvania. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824. I. 939.) 

January 7. — Votes in favor of agreeing to the report of the Committee 
on Elections, admitting Parmenio Adams to a seat. The report was agreed 
to. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824, I. 944.) 

January 13. — Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading the bill 
for obtaining the necessary surveys, plans, and estimates on the subject of 
roads and canals. It was so ordered. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824. I. 1041.) 

* January 15. — Introduces and speaks upon a resolution for the appoint- 
ment of a committee to inquire in what manner the resolutions of Congress 
for the erection of a monument to Washington may be best accomplished. 
(Ann. 18 C. I s. 1823-1824, I. 1044-1046, 1047-1048.) 

* February 16. — Remarks on the Tariff Rill, with reference to the proposed 
duty of six cents a yard on imported bagging. (Ann. iS C. i s. 1823-1824. 
I. 1546, 1547.) 

* February 17. — Remarks on the Tariff Rill, with reference to the 
proposed <luty of six cents a yard on imported bagging, and moves an 
amendment by striking out six and inserting two and a half. (Ann. 18 C. 
I .s. 1823-1824, I. 1565, 1566.) 

* February 19. — Remarks on the Tariff Rill, with reference to the pro- 
posed duty of six cents a yard on imported bagging and the resolution 
offered to in(|uire what effect the passage of the bill would have upon the 
revenue. (Ann. 18 C. I s. 1823-1824, I. 1500.) 

February 20. — Votes on certain amendments to tlic Military Appropria- 



Ann. Annals of Cons:re*s.—C-^ConKrcss.—s. --session.—* Prinlcii herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: HOUSE, 1824 xxi 

tion Bill, as to the purchase of Gridley's farm, in the State of New York. 
(Ann. i8 C. i s. 1823-1824, I. 1617, 1618.) 

February 23, 24.— Votes for a motion to lay on the table the resolution 
for an inquiry into the effect of the passage of the proposed Tariff Bill. 
(Ann. 18 C. I s. 1823-1824, I. 1623, 1629.) 

"* February 26.— Renews motion to amend the Tariff Bill so as to 
change the duty on cotton bagging from six cents to two and a half cents 
per square yard. The amendment was agreed to. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823- 
1824, I. 1678-1679.) 

February 27.— Votes against taking up for consideration the resolution 
to inquire into the effect of the passage of the proposed Tariff Bill. (Ann. 
18 C I s. 1823-1824, I. 1681.) 

Remarks on the Tariff Bill, with reference to a motion to strike out the 
provision for a duty of twenty-five cents per bushel on wheat. (Id. 1696.) 

* February 28. — Speech on the Tariff Bill, with reference to the duty on 
bar iron. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824, II. 1709-1712.) 

* March 4. — Remarks on the Tariff Bill, with reference to the duty on 
woollen goods. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824, II. 1742.) 

March 11. — Advocates a motion to strike out of the General Appropriation 
Bill for 1824 the word "Lima," in the list of ministers to South America. 
(Ann. 18 C. I s. 1823-1824, II. 1766.) 

March 13. — Votes against concurring in a provision in the General 
Appropriation Bill for 1824, of $25,000 for the north portico of the President's 
house. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824, II. 1782.) 

March 18.— Votes in favor of the report of the Committee on Elections 
against the right of John Bailey to a seat. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824, II. 
1855-) 

* March 23.— Remarks on a motion amending the Tariff Bill so as to 
reduce the proposed duty on hemp from two cents a pound to one and one- 
half cents. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824, II. 1888-1893.) 

* March 25.— Remarks on a motion to amend the Tariff Bill so as to 
extend the drawback system. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824, II. 1910, 191 1.) 

April 8. — Votes in favor of a motion to reconsider the vote taken on the 
report of the Committee of the Whole on the amendment to the Tariff 
Bill reducing the minimum on woollen goods from eighty to forty cents a 
square yard; and votes in favor of this amendment. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823- 
1824, II. 2255, 2257.) 

*April 9.— Speech on the Tariff Bill, opposing reduction of duty on bar 
iron. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824, II. 2258-2271.) 

April 10. — Votes on various amendments to the Tariff Bill. (Ann. 18 C. 
I s. 1823-1824, II. 2289, 2290, 2291, 2293.) 

April 12.— Votes on various amendments to the Tariff Bill. (Ann. 18 C. 
I s. 1823-1824, II. 2310, 2311.) 

Votes on various amendments to the Tariff Bill. (Id. 2312, 2313, 2314, 
2316.) 

April 13.— Votes on various amendments to the Tariff Bill. (Ann. 18 C. 
I s. 1823-1824, II. 2328, 2329, 2222.) 

April 14. — Votes against postponing the consideration of the Tariff Bill. 
(Ann. 18 C. I s. 1823-1824, II. 2337.) 

Votes in favor of putting the main question of the Tariff Bill. (Id. 2341.) 

Votes in favor of the main question for engrossing and reading a third 
time the Tariff Bill. (Id. 2342.) 

Votes against fixing July 4th as the day for reading a third time the 
Tariff Bill. (Id. 2344.) 



Ann.= Annals of Congress. — C.=Congress. — s.=session. — *=Prlnted herein. 



xxii 'rilK WORKS Ol JA.Mi:.^ lilc llANAX 

April i6.— Votes against a motion to lay the Tariff Bill on the table. 
(Ann. i8 C i s. i82j-i8.'4. II. 2428.) 

Votes in favor of putting the main question of ili- passage of tlie 
Tariff Bill. (Id. 2428.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of tlie Tariff Bill. ( l.J. J429.) 

Afril ly.— Inquires as to the object of Xinian Edwards in memorializing 
the House with reference to alleged injustice done to him in a report of 
the Secretary of the Treasury. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824, II. 2450.) 

April 21. — Votes in favor of a motion to recommit the Fortifications 
Bill. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824, II. 2469.) 

Votes in favor of referring the joint resolution of the Senate fixing the 
lime for adjournment to tiic proper conmiittee. (Id. 2470.) 

April 23. — Moves that the Mouse go into Committee of the Whole on 
the bill "to alter the judicial districts of Pennsylvania." (Ann. 18 C. i s. 
1823-1824, II. 2481.) 

Discusses a bill for the relief of Penelope Denncy. Moves to strike out 
the enacting clause, but the motion is defeated. Votes against ordering the 
bill to a third reading. (Id. 2485, 2486.) 

April 28. — Votes in favor of ordering to a third reading the bill for the 
relief of Daniel Carroll, and others. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824. II. 2501.) 

April 30. — .Asks concerning a resolution instructing the Committee on 
the Judiciary to inquire into the e.xpediency of certain legislation affecting 
the District of Columbia. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824, II. 2506.) 

May 5. — Votes against a bill for the remission of duties on goods ini- 
ported into Castine, Maine, while it was in possession of the British during 
the War of 1812. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824. II. 2549.) 

May 6. — Advocates the bill authorizing the creation of stock for the 
awards of the Commissioners under the treaty with Spain of February 22. 
1819. (Ann. 18 C. I s. 1823-1824. II. 2554.) 

Votes against a motion to postpone consideration of the bill. (Id. 2555.) 

May 7. — Votes in favor of the passage of the bill authorizing the creation 
of five million dollars stock for the awards of the Commissioners under the 
treaty with Spain of February 22, 1819. (Ann. 18 C. I s. 1823-1824, II. 2574.) 

* May 7, 8. — Remarks on the bill making appropriation for removing 
obstructions from the bed of the Mississippi. Ohio, and Missouri rivers. 
(Ann. 18 C. I s. 1823-1824. II. 2578, 2583, 2584.) 

* May 10. — Offers and speaks upon an amendment to the above bill. 
(Ann. 18 C. I s. 1823-1824. II. 2586-2587, 2588.) 

* May II. — Requests leave to record his vote against the bill, which had 
been passed, for improving the navigation of the Oliio and Mississippi rivers. 
Request denied. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824, II. 2597.) 

* May 13. — Remarks on a resolution as to the sale of public lots in the 
city of Washington. (Ann. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824, II. 2614.) 

May 14. — Votes for the motion that the House go into Committee of the 
Whole for the purpose of considering the Tariff Bill as reported from the 
Senate. (Ann. 18 C i s. 1823-1824. II. 2621.) 

May 15. — Votes against various Senate amendments to the Tariff Bill. 
(Ann. 18 C. I s. 1823-1824, II. 2f^26. 2627. 2628, 2620.) 

•Uiiv 17. — Votes against a motion to recede from the disagreement to the 
Senate amendments to the Tariff Bill. (.Xnn. 18 C. i s. 1823-1824. II. 2634.) 

* iMay 18. — Remarks on a joint rfsolution fixing the day of adjournment 
of Congress. (Ann. 18 C. l s. iS.'3-i8.'4, II. 2651-2652.) 

Mav 19. — Votes against a motion to postpone indefinitely the consideration 
of the tariff Bill. (Ann. 18 C. i <^. 1823-1824. 1 1. ^H^73) 



Ann -Annnliiot ConRrcnn.— C. ConRTcts.— •.-session.— • Printetl herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: HOUSE, 1825 xxiii 

Votes in favor of concurring in the report of the Committee of Confer- 
ence in relation to amendments to the Tariff Bill. (Id. 2674.) 

* December 21. — Submits and speaks upon a motion to strike out the 4th 
section of the bill for occupying the mouth of the Columbia River. (Reg. 
18 C. 2 s. 1824-1825, I. 36.) 

December 23. — Votes in favor of a bill concerning General Lafayette. 
(Reg. 18 C. 2 s. 1824-1825, I. 55.) 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES (Continued), 1825. 

* January 3, 1825. — Remarks on a bill for the relief of the Niagara 
sufferers. (Reg. 18 C. 2 s. 1824-1825, I. 121-123.) 

January 6. — Votes against an amendment to the bill for the relief of the 
Niagara sufferers. (Reg. 18 C. 2 s. 1824-1825, I. 145.) 

* January 7. — Remarks on a bill for punishing certain crimes against the 
United States ; and also moves to amend the bill so as to provide a lesser 
penalty for the crime of stealing by a passenger aboard a vessel. The 
amendment was agreed to. (Reg. 18 C. 2 s. 1824-1825, I. 157-158.) 

* January 11. — Remarks on the request in the President's message for an 
examination of his accounts. (Reg. 18 C. 2 s. 1824-1825, I. 176-177.) 

* January 13. — Remarks on the bill providing for a Western National 
Road. (Reg. 18 C. 2 s. 1824-1825, I. 206-207.) 

January 18. — Votes against ordering to be engrossed for a third reading 
the bill providing for the Western National Road. (Reg. iS C. 2 s. 1824-1825, 
I. 261.) 

January 19. — Votes against the passage of the bill for the relief of the 
Niagara sufferers. (Reg. 18 C. 2 s. 1824-1825, I. 274.) 

* January 21. — Remarks on the bill authorizing a subscription to the 
stock of the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal. (Reg. 18 C. 2 s. 1824-1825, I. 

331-332.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of this bill. (Id. 32,3.) 

* February 2. — Remarks on the report of the Select Committee on rules 
to be observed by the House in choosing a President. (Reg. 18 C. 2 s. 1824- 
1825, I. 422-423.) 

February 4. — The Speaker of the House (Mr. Clay) having appealed for 
an investigation into the charge of a corrupt bargain between Adams and 
himself, Buchanan, moves an adjournment. Motion negatived. (Reg. 18 C. 
2 s. 1824-1825, I. 482.) 

Votes in favor of the indefinite postponement of the consideration of 
the subject of the Speaker's appeal to the House, and against referring the 
matter to a select committee. (Id. 484, 486.) 

* February 21. — Remarks on a bill concerning the extension of drawback 
duties. (Reg. 18 C. 2 s. 1824-1825, I. 636.) 

February 23. — Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading the bill 
providing for the payment to Virginia of interest on militia claims. (Reg. 
18 C. 2 s. 1824-1825, I. 667.) 

February 25. — Votes in favor of a bill to confirm the acts of the legisla- 
tures of Maryland and Virginia incorporating the Chesapeake and Ohio 
Canal Company. (Reg. 18 C. 2 s. 1824-1825, I. 687.) 

* March i. — Moves to amend the Senate bill for the suppression of 
piracy, by reducing the number of sloops of war and the sum appropriated, 
and makes remarks on his amendment. The amendment was agreed to. 
(Reg. 18 C. 2 s. 1824-1825, I. 729. 730, 731, 732.) 



Reg.=Register of Debates.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



xxiv lllK WOKKS (H- .JAMi:^ iUi llANA.N 

March 2.— Remarks on the bill to secure the accountability of public 
officers, moving to postpone it indefinitely. The bill was recommitted to the 
Conunittee of the Whole. (Reg. 18 C. 2 s. 1824-1825, I. yiy.) 

* December 15. — Oflfcrs a resolution calling for the proceedings of the 
court-martial in the case of Gjuunodore Porter, and makes remarks thereon. 
(Reg. ly C 1 s. 1825-1826, II., pt. I. 806-808.) 

* December 16. — Remarks on his resolution calling for the proceedings 
of the cmirt-martial in the case of Commodore Porter. Tlic resolution was 
passed. (Reg. ly C. I s. 1825-1826, II., pt. 1, 815-817.; 

* December 27. — Remarks on a resolution calling for a statement of losses 
in the collection of customs. (Reg. 19 C. i s. 1825-1826, II., pt. i, 860.) 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATI\'ES (Continued), 1826. 

January 4, 1826.— Votes in favor of a resolution calling on the President 
for a list of appointments to office of members of Congress. (Reg. 19 C. I s. 
1825-1826, II.. pt. I, 871.) 

* January 5.— Remarks on a bill concerning the Judiciary. (Reg. 19 C 
I s. 1825-1826, II.. pt. I, 887-888.) 

* January 9.— Speech on the same bill. (Reg. 19 C. i s. 1825-1826, II., 
pt. 1, 916-925.) 

* January 10.— Continues speech on the bill concerning the Judiciary. 
(Reg. 19 C. 1 s. 1 825- 1 826, II.. pt. I, 9^7-929. 930-932.) 

January 19. — Votes against an amendment to the Judiciary System Bill, 
decreasing the number of associate judges. (Reg. 19 C. i s. 1825-1826, II.. 
pt. I. 1054.) 

January 25. — Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading the 
Judiciary System Bill. (Reg. 19 C. 1 s. II., pt. 1, 1149.) 

* January 27.— Remarks on the bill making appropriations for fortifica- 
tions. (Reg. 19 C. I s. 1825-1826, II., pt. I, 1184-1186.) 

* January 30.— Remarks on the same bill. (Reg. 19 C. i s. 1825-1826, 
II., pt. I, 1204.) 

January 31. — Asks for the withdrawal of a motion to lay on the table 
the resolution concerning the Congress of Panama. (Reg. 19 C. 1 s. 1825- 
1826, II., pt. I, 1219.) 

February 13.— Votes against the passage of a bill for the relief of 
Penelope Denney. (Reg. 19 C. 1 s. 1825-1826, II., pt. i, 1346.) 

February 17.— Offers and speaks upon a resolution to amend the Consti- 
tution regarding the election of President. (Reg. 19 C. i s. 1825-1826. II.. 
pt. I, I4i7-'4i8.) 

* February 20.— Remarks on a proposed amendment to the Constitution 
in relation to the election of President and Vice-President. (Reg. 19 C. i s. 
1825-1826, II., pt. I, 1417; House Report 19, 19 C. I s.) 

* March 11. — Remarks on a bill for subscription to stock of the Dismal 
Swamp Canal Company. (Reg. 19 C. 1 s. 1825-1826, II., pt. !, 1618-1620.) 

* March 25. — Remarks on a resolution of ituiuiry regarding ilie statement 
by the American minister to Mexico concerning a pledge of the United States 
to prevent foreign interference other than Spanish in South .America. (Reg. 
19 C. I s. 1825-1826. II., pt. 2. 1767-1768.) 

Presides in Committee of the Whole during the consideration of a bill 
concerning Massachusetts militia claims. (Id. 17^18.) 

* March 27. — Remarks on a resolution regarding tlie statement of the 
American minister to the Mexican Government. (Reg. 19 C. i s. 1825-1826, 
II., pt. 2, 1808-1810.) 



ReK.-Rejtister of I>K-itr ' onKress.—s. -session.— '-^ Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: HOUSE, 1826 xxv 

March 31. — Remarks on a resolution to inquire into the expediency of 
discontinuing the Navy-yard at Philadelphia. (Reg. 19 C. i s. 1825-1826, II. 
pt. 2, 1930-1931-) 

April I. — Votes in favor of a resolution to amend the Constitution so as 
to prevent the election of President and Vice-President from devolving on 
Congress. (Reg. 19 C. i s. 1825-1826, II., pt. 2, 2004.) 

Votes against a resolution concerning an amendment to the Constitution 
for a tmiform system of voting by districts. (Id. 2005.) 

April 3. — Moves that the amendments to the Constitution, submitted by 
him, should be referred to a select committee of twenty-four. (Reg. 19 C. 
I s. 1825-1826, II., pt. 2, 2007.) 

* April 4. — Offers and speaks upon a resolution concerning the mission 
to Panama. (Reg. 19 C. i s. 1825-1826, II., pt. 2, 2029.) 

April 7. — Presides in Committee of the Whole during consideration of 
the subject of the jNIassachusetts militia claims. (Reg. 19 C. i s. 1825-1826, 
II., pt. 2, 2099.) 

April 10. — Moves that Committee of the Whole rise and House adjourn. 
(Reg. 19 C. I s. 1825-1826, II., pt. 2, 2166.) 

* April II. — Speech on the mission to Panama. (Reg. 19 C. i s. 1825- 
1826, II., pt. 2, 2168-2182.) 

* April 18. — Remarks on the mission to Panama. (Reg. 19 C. i s. 1825- 
1826, II., pt. 2, 2368-2369, 2370, 2374, 2376.) 

April 20. — Further remarks on the mission. (Reg. 19 C. i s. 1825-1826, 
II., pt. 2, 2412-2413.) 

Votes in favor of an amendment to the resolution concerning the mission 
to Panama. (Id. 24^7.) 

April 21. — Votes in favor of the amended resolution concerning the 
mission. (Reg. 19 C. i s. 1825-1826, II., pt. 2, 2490.) 

Participates in a debate on the General Appropriation Bill, with refer- 
ence to a communication from the Department of State on the subject of 
salary and outfit. (Id. 2491.) 

April 22. — Votes for the bill making an appropriation for carrying into 
effect the appointment of a mission to Panama. (Reg. 19 C. i s. 1825-1826, 
II., pt. 2, 2514.) 

* April 24. — Speech on a bill for the relief of Revolutionary officers. 
(Reg. 19 C. I s. 1825-1826, II., pt. 2, 2540-2543.) 

April 25. — Moves to discharge the Committee of the Whole from further 
consideration of the bill for the relief of Revolutionary officers. (Reg. 19 C. 
I s. 1825-1826, II., pt. 2, 2573.) 

Alay 2. — Votes against recommitment of the bill for the relief of Revolu- 
tionary officers. (Reg. 19 C. i s. 1825-1826, II., pt. 2, 2592.) 

* December 11. — Remarks on a bill granting public lands to the New 
York and Pennsylvania institutions for the instruction of the deaf and dumb. 
(Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, III. 527.) 

December 14. — Moves to table for one day a resolution to discharge 
the Committee of the Whole from further consideration of the Massachusetts 
Militia Claims Bill. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, III. 531.) 

* Offers a resolution calling for information on the Panama Congress. 
(Niles' Weekly Register, Dec. 23, 1826, XXXI. 263.) 

December 15. — Moves the consideration of the resolution to discharge 
the Committee of the Whole from further consideration of the Massachusetts 
Militia Claims Bill. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, III. 531.) 

December 19. — Moves to postpone further consideration of a bill allowing 
the importation of brandy in casks of not less than fifteen gallons. (Reg. 19 
C. 2 s. 1826-1827, III. 543.) 



Reg.=Register of Debates. — C.= Congress. — s.=session. — *=Printed herein. 



xxvi rili: WORKS OF JAMES BrCHAXAX 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES (Continued), 1827. 

* January 3, 1827. — Remarks on the bill regarding the importation of 
brandy. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826- 1827, III. 588-591. 590-507) 

Votes against the passage of the bill. (Id. 600.) 

* January 9. — Remarks on a resolution concerning appointments of 
charges dcs affaires. (Reg. IQ C. 2 s. 1S26-1827. III. 630-640.) 

* January 12. — Remarks on the bill for the relief of Revolutionary 
ofRcers. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, III. 683^585.) 

Votes against a resolution to recommit the bill with instructions to 
include certain militia officers. (Id. 690.) 

January 15. — Votes against an amendment to the same bill. (Reg. 19 C. 

2 s. 1826-1827, III. 729) 

January 16. — Remarks on a motion to go into Committee of the Whole on 
the bill for the relief of Revolutionary officers. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, 

III- 730.) 

January 17.— Presides in Committee of the Whole during the considera- 
tion of a bill concerning duties on wool and woollens. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 

1826-1827, III. 732.) 

* January 18.— Remarks on the bill concerning duties on wool and 
woollens. Moves to discharge the Conmiittec of the Whole from further 
consideration of the bill. (Reg. 19 C 2 s. i826r-i827, III. 747-748. 749) 

January 19.— Remarks on the resignation of L. McLanc from the 
chairmanship of the Committee of Ways and Means. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826- 

1827, III. 751.) ,. r r ^ 

Votes in favor of reading a third time the bill lor the relief of sufferers 
by fire at Alexandria, D. C. (Id. 773-) 

* January 22.— Remarks on his motion to discharge the Committee of 
the Whole from further consideration of the bill concerning duties on wool 
and woollens. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, III. 779-780.) 

January 25.— Presides in Committee of the Whole during the considera- 
tion of this bill. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, HI. 820.) 

January 30.— Presides in Committee of the Whole House durmg the 
consideration of the same bill. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, HI. 857.) 

* January 31.— Remarks on a proposed resolution of inquiry as to a 
possible residuum of the indemnity for slaves unlawfully carried away. (Reg. 
19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, HI. 879-880.) 

* I-ebruary 6. — Remarks on the reference of memorials in behalf of a 
polar expedition. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1S27, HI. 949-) 

Votes against a motion to lay on the table a resolution inquiring as to 
the publishers of the laws of the United States in the several States. (Id. 

Votes against putting the question whether the bill concerning wool and 
woollens shall be ordered to a third reading. (Id. 986.) 

* February 7.— Remarks on a motion to recommit the bill concerning 
duties on wool and woollens, and votes in favor of recommitment. (Reg. 
19 C 2 s. 1826-1827, III. 995) 

Remarks on the bill. (Id. (;97-iooo.) 

February 8.— Votes against sustaining the Chair on a ruling that pending 
the previous question a motion for a call of the House is not in order. (Reg. 
19 C. 2 !>. i82fr-i8j7, III. i026.) 

Votes against putting the main question of engrossing for a third reading 
the bill concerning duties on wool and woollens. (Id. 1027.) 



Reg.-ReKittorof ncUics.-C.-CongreM.-s. -session.— •Prinlctl herein. 



CAREER Ix\ CONGRESS: HOUSE, 1827 xxvii 

Votes against engrossing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 1028.) 

* February 9.— Remarks on the President's message concerning the United 
States and Georgia. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, HI. 1032-1034.) 

* February 10. — ]\Ioves to recommit the bill concerning duties on wool 
and woollens with instructions. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, III. 1066-1067.) 

Remarks on his motion. (Id. 1078-1070, 1080.) 
Votes against laying the bill on the table. (Id. 1087.) 
Votes against putting the main question of the passage of the bill. 
(Id. 1098.) 

Votes against the passage of the bill. (Id. 1099.) 

February 12.— Presides in Committee of the Whole during the consider- 
ation of a bill providing for the exchange of certain United States stock for 
other stock. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, III. 11 19.) 

* February 15.— Remarks on an appropriation for an outfit for the 
minister at the Congress of Tacubaya. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, III 1188- 
1189.) 

Votes against appropriating $9,000 for the outfit. (Id. 1214.) 

* February 16.— Remarks on the IMilitary Appropriations Bill, with refer- 
ence to the appropriation for the continuation of the Cumberland Road. 
(Reg. ig C. 2 s. 1826-1827, III. 1220.) 

February 19. — Votes in favor of a provision in the Military Appropria- 
tions Bill for the Georgia militia claims. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, III. 
1265.) 

Votes in favor of an appropriation in the Military Appropriations Bill 
for the continuation of the Cumberland Road. (Id. 1265.) 

* February 20.— Remarks on the Military Appropriations Bill, with refer- 
ence to an appropriation for surveving routes for roads and canals. (Reg. 
19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827. III. I283-I28.>) 

February 21. — Votes in favor of an appropriation for surveys. (Reg. 19 
C. 2 s. 1826-1827, III. 1332.) 

* February 23. — Remarks on a bill making appropriations for the repair 
of public buildings. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, III. 1376.) 

* February 24. — Remarks on a bill for the preservation and repair of the 
Cumberland Road. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, III. 1397, 1398, 1399-1400.) 

Moves to amend the bill, and makes remarks thereon. The amendment 
is agreed to. (Id. 1403, 1404.) 

February 26. — Votes for the bill for the preservation and repair of the 
Cumberland Road. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, III. 1418.) 

Remarks on a motion to go into Committee of the Whole for the purpose 
of considering a bill regulating commercial intercourse between the United 
States and the British colonies. (Id. 1419.) 

February 28. — Speaks on the bill regulating commercial intercourse with 
the British colonies, with reference to exempting the lakes and inland waters 
of the United States. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, III. 1481.) 

March i. — Remarks on the Navy Bill, with reference to a motion to 
strike out the provision for a Naval Academy. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 1826-1827, 
HI. 1497.) 

March 2. — Votes against adhering to a House amendment to the bill 
regulating commercial intercourse with the British colonies. (Reg. 19 C. 2 s. 
1826-1827, III. 1531.) 

December 20. — IMoves an adjournment. (Reg. 20 C. i s. 1827-1828,, IV., 
pt. I. 842.) 

December 21. — Votes against a resolution instructing the Committee of 
Waj'S and Means to report the bill for the sale of stock held by the United 



Reg.=Register of Debates. — C.=Congress. — s.=session. — *=Printed herein. 



xxviii nil; WoKKS OF .lAMKS HI ( IIANAN 

States in the Bank ot the L intcd States. ( Reg. » C i s. 18^7-18^8. W., 
pi. I. 8>8.) 

* December 31. — Remarks on a resolution empowering the Committee on 
^fannfartiires to ascertain and report facts relating to tariff revision. (.Reg. 
JO C I -s. i8,J7-i8-'H, IV.. pt. I. 875-876, 877.) 

Votes in favor of the resolution as amended. (Id. 88g.) 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES (Continued). 18^. 

Jiii.itiiry 5. iSjS. — X'otes for a resolution to inquire into the expediency 
of having a picture painted of the battle of New Orleans. (Reg. .20 C. i s. 
1827-1828, IV., pt. I, 952.) 

'January 14. — Offers and speaks upon an amendment to the hill for the 
preservation and repair of the Cumberland Road, providing for the retro- 
cession of the road to the States through which it passes. (Reg. 20 C. i s. 
1827-1828. I\'., pt. I, 1004-1005.) 

* January 16. — Remarks on a resolution as to the court-martial held at 
Mobile, December 5, 1814, for the trial of certain Tennessee militiamen. 
.Moves an amendment to the resolution calling for a copy of the order i>sued 
by Governor Blount to General Jackson. (Reg. 20 C. l s. 1827-1828. IV., 
pt. I. 1031-1032.) 

* January 23. — Remarks on a resolution favoring retrenchment. (Reg. 
20 C. 1 s. 1827-1828, IV., pt. I. 1088-1090.) 

Votes against an amendment to a bill for the relief of Marigny 
d'Auterive. (Id. 1122.) 

* January 24. — Remarks on resolutions favoring ntniichment. (Reg. 
20 C. 1 s. \S27-1S2K IV.. pt. 1, 1136-1138.) 

* Januarv 26. — Remarks on resolutions favoring retrenchment. (Reg. 20 
C. 1 s. 1827-1828. IV.. pt. I. 1189-1 191.) 

* February 4. — Speech on resolutions favoring retrenchment. ( Reg. 20 
C. 1 s. 1827-1828. IV.. pt. I. 1360-1377.) 

l-chruary 6. — Remarks on resolutions favoring retrenchment. (Keg. 20 
C. 1 s. 1S27-18J8, IV.. pt. 1. 1447.) 

* February 11. — Remarks on a motion to print the documents relating to 
the court-martial at Mobile. (Reg. 20 C. 1 s. 1827-1828. I\'., pt. 2. 1497.) 

* February 14. — Remarks on a bill relating to internal improvements. 
(Reg. 20 C. I s. 1827-1828, I\.. pt. 2. 1 513-1514.) 

* Mareli 1. — Remarks on a resolution concerning the use of the hall of 
rne Hou'-f of Representatives. (Retr. jo C. i s. iS_v-i8_'S, I\'.. pt. 2. 1702- 

1703) 

* March 24. — Remarks on a bill relating to the claim of R. \V. Meade. 
(Reg. 20 C. I s. 1827-1828. IV.. pt. 2. 1967-i<X)8.) 

* March 27. — Moves to amend the Tariff Bill with reference to duties on 
woollens. (Reg. 20 C. 1 s. i827-!8j8, IV., pt. 2. 2038-2039 ") 

* March 28. — Remarks on the Tariff Bill with reference to his amend- 
ment. (Reg. 20 C I s. 1827-1828. IV., pt. 2, 2039-2045, 2050.) 

* March 31. — Remarks on a bill relating to the sale of certain public 
lands. (Reg. 20 C. I s. 1827-1828. IV.. pt. 2. 2052. 2053.) 

*At>ril I. 2.— Speech on the Tariff Bill. (Reg. 20 C. i s. 1827-1828. IV.. 
pt. 2. 2079. 2089-2110.) 

.-j/Ti/ 2. — Votes in favor of the passage of a hill for the relief of the 
widow of General Brown. (Id. 2089.) 

.4/>rt7 4. — I'rciposes an amendment to the Tariff Bill, which amendment 
is rejected. (Reg. 20 C - - 1827-1828. IV.. pt. j. 2188.) 



RcK. ■ Register of I>ch4He».—C. Con»rc«!».— ». -leMion.— * Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: HOUSE, 1828 xxix 

* April 8.— Moves amendments to the Tariff Bill, relating to distilled 
spirits, and makes remarks thereon. (Reg. 20 C. i s. 1827-1828, IV., pt. 2, 
2219, 2221.) 

Votes against an amendment to the Tariff Bill. (Id. 2245.) 

* April 9.— Moves an amendment to the Tariff Bill, relating to duties on 
woollens, and makes remarks thereon. (Reg. 20 C. i s. 1827-1828, IV., pt. 2, 
2252-2253.) 

April 10. — Participates in a discussion on an amendment to the Tariff 

Bill. (Reg. 20 C. I s. 1827-1828, IV., pt. 2, 2288.) 

Makes remarks as to the order of proceedings. (Id. 2289.) 

Votes on various amendments to the Tariff Bill. (Id. 2289.) 

Votes against the decision of the Chair on a certain appeal by Cam- 

breleng. The decision of the Chair negatived. (Id. 2305.) 

Votes against recommitting the Tariff Bill with instructions. (Id. 2308.) 
April 12. — Votes in favor of an amendment to the Tariff Bill. (Reg. 20 

C. I s. 1827-1828. IV., pt. 2, 2313.) 

'■^- April 15. — Remarks on the Tariff Bill, with reference to the duty on 

molasses. (Reg. 20 C. i s. 1827-1828, IV., pt. 2, 2346.) 

Votes in favor of putting the main question whether the bill should be 

engrossed for a third reading. (Id. 2348.) 

Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 2348.) 

* April 19. — Remarks on a motion to postpone indefinitely the considera- 
tion of the Tariff Bill. (Reg. 20 C. i s. 1827-1828, IV., pt. 2, J2414.) 

April 22. — Votes in favor of putting the main question on the passage of 
the Tariff Bill. (Reg. 20 C. I s. 1827-1828, IV., pt. 2, 2470.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill. (Id. 2471.) 

April 24. — Votes in favor of the adoption of a resolution directing the 
Committee on Military Affairs to report a bill abolishing the office of major- 
general. (Reg. 20 C. I s. 1827-1828, IV., pt. 2, 2493.) 

* April 28. — Remarks on the question as to the proper committee to 
which to refer a bill to authorize railroad companies to import iron and 
machinery free of duty. (Reg. 20 C. i s. 1827-1828. IV., pt. 2, 2505.) 

* April 30. — Remarks on the date of adjournment. (Reg. 20 C. i s. 1827- 
1828, IV., pt. 2, 2541-2542.) 

* May I. — Remarks on a bill concerning naturalization. (Reg. 20 C. i s. 
1827-1828, IV., pt. 2. 2555-2556.) 

May T2. — Expresses the hope, during consideration of the bill concerning 
officers of the Revolutionary War, that the Committee of the Whole will 
rise. (Reg. 20 C. i s. 1827-1828, IV., pt. 2, 2660.) 

May 13. — Votes in favor of the passage of the bill concerning officers of 
the Revolutionary War. (Reg. 20 C. r s. 1827-1828, IV., pt. 2, 2670.) 

May 14. — Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading a bill to 
enlarge the powers of the corporations of Washington, Georgetown, and 
Alexandria. (Reg. 20 C. I s. 1827-1828, IV., pt. 2, 2677.) 

* Makes remarks on the bill abolishing the office of major-general. (Id. 
2679-2680, 2684-2685.) 

Votes in favor of ordering the bill to be engrossed for a third reading. 
(Id. 2694.) 

* December 11. — Remarks on extension of the term of exportations with 
benefit of drawback. (Reg. 20 C. 2 s. 1828-1829, V. 98-99.) 

December 16. — Votes against ordering to be engrossed for a third reading 
the bill increasing the amount of drawback on sugars refined within the 
United States. (Reg. 20 C. 2 s. 1828-1829, V. iii.) 

* December 23. — Remarks on a bill authorizing the occupation of the 
Oregon River. (Reg. 20 C. 2 s. 1828-1829, V. 126.) 



Reg.=Register of Debates. — C.=Congress. — s.=session. — *=Printed herein. 



XXX lUi: WOKKS OF .lAMKS lil( HAXAX 

HOUSE OF Ki:i'RESEXTATlVi:S (Continued), 1829. 

* January 15, 1829. — Offers an amendment to the Cumberland Road Bill, 
providing for the retrocession of several parts of the road to the States 
through whicli tlicy pass. (Reg. 20 C. 2 s. 1828-182Q, V. 215.) 

* January 19. — Speech on the Cumberland Road Bill and on his amend- 
ment. (Reg. 20 C 2 s. 1828-1820, V. 240-244.) 

* January 20. — Remarks on the bill to establish a Territory of Huron. 
(Reg. 20 C. 2 s. 1828-1829, V. 245.) 

February 4. — Votes against enciro^ising for a third reading the bill to 
repeal the tonnage duties upun siiips and vessels of the United States and 
upon certain foreign vessels. (Reg. 20 C. 2 s. 1828-1829, V. 318.) 

* February 6. — Remarks on a proposed amendment to the Constitution, to 
render the President ineligible for a second term. ( Reg. 20 C. 2 s. 1828-1829, 
V. 320-321.) 

* February 12. — Speech on the Cumberland Road Bill and his amend- 
ment. Amendment rciccted. (Reg. 20 C. 2 s. i8_'8-iS29, V. ^^i, appended, 

1-7.) 

Offers in the House the >ame amendment moved by him in Committee of 
the Whole on January 15th. (Id. 351.) 

February 18. — Amendment to the Cumberland Road Bill rejected. (Reg. 

20 C. 2 s. 1828-182Q, V. 361.) 

Moves another amendment, for erection of toll-gates and collection of 

tolls. Makes remarks on this amendment. (Id. 361.) 

Votes against engrossing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 361.) 
February 26. — Votes against the passage of the bill to repeal tonnage 

duties upon ships and vessels of the United States and upon certain 

foreign vessels. (Reg. 20 C. 2 s. 1828-1829, V. 385.) 

* March 2. — Offers an amendment to the Cumberland Road Bill, as 
returned from the Senate, providing for the erection of gates and the collec- 
tion of toll. Makes remarks on this amendment. (Reg. 20 C. 2 s. 1828-1829, 
V. 38.=;. 386.) 

* December 7. — Remarks on the election of a clerk of the House. (Reg. 

21 C. I s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. I, 471.) 

* December 9. — Remarks on the appointment of standing committees of 
the House. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. i, 472.) 

* December 15. — Remarks on a resolution for the printing of the annual 
report of the Secretary of the Treasury. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829-1830, VI.. 

pt. I. 47.=5) 

December 29. — Remarks on a bill to regulate the pay and mileage of 
members of Congress. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1820-1830, VI.. pt. i, 488.) 

* December 30. — Remarks on a resolution to inquire into the expediency 
of distributing the proceeds of the sale of public lands. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 
1829-1830, VI., pt. I, 489-490.) 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES (Continued), 1830. 

* January 4, 1830. — Reports on the claim of James Linsey. (House 
Report 48, 21 C. I s.) 

•Reports on allowances to niii>i>. (House Report 49. 21 C. I s.) 

* Reports on appeals and writs of error. (House Report 50, 21 C. I s.) 

* Reports on the case of Manuel del Barco. (House Report 51, 21 C. 
I s.) 

* January 13. — Reports on the lobster fishery. (House Report 79, 
21 C. 1 s.) 

Reg.^ Register o( Dcbntcn.— C. ConRreM.—s. -session.— •- Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: HOUSE, 1830 xxxi 

* January 14. — Speech on a bill establishing circuit courts and abridging 
the jurisdiction of district courts in certain districts. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829- 

1830, VI., pt. 1, 530-537.) 

January 19. — Moves that the House go into Committee of the Whole for 
consideration of the Judiciary Bill. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. i, 
540.) 

* February 10. — Remarks on the Civil Appropriations Bill, with reference 
to diplomatic expenses. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. i, 558-559.) 

* February 13. — Report on the boundary between Georgia and Florida. 
(House Report 191, 21 C. i s.) 

February 18. — Votes in favor of the passage of a bill for the relief of 
the widows and orphans of the men on the sloop of war JJornet. (Reg. 
21 C. I s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. I, 580.) 

* February 24. — Remarks on a bill relating to the Indian question. (Reg. 
21 C. I s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. I, 581.) 

* February 26. — Remarks on a resolution of inquiry looking to the 
diminution of the use of ardent spirits in the Navy. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829- 
1830, VI., pt. I, 589.) 

* March i. — Remarks on the question of printing a memorial from the 
Society of Friends in New England on Indian affairs and the Indian question. 
(Reg. 21 C. I s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. I, 593, 594.) 

March 10. — Moves that the House go into Committee of the Whole for 
the purpose of considering the Judiciary Bill. Motion carried. (Reg. 21 C. 
I s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. I, 598.) 

March 13. — Votes against engrossing for a third reading a bill to remit 
the duties paid on goods destroyed by fire. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829-1830, VI., 
pt. I, 622.) 

* March 15. — Report on a resolution for extending patent rights to non- 
resident foreigners. (House Report 292, 21 C. i s.) 

* March 18. — Remarks on an amendment to the Revolutionary Pen- 
sioners Bill. (Reg. 21 C. I s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. i, 628.) 

Votes in favor of ordering the bill to be engrossed for a third reading. 
(Id. 629.) 

* March 22. — Report on the case of Nicoll and Conard. (House Report 
323, 21 C. I s.) 

* March 2^. — Report, and remarks thereon, recommending impeachment 
of Judge Peck. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. i, 6^7; House Report 
325, 21 C. I s.) 

March 31. — Votes against a resolution relating to the pay of members of 
Congress. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. 2, 720.) 

* Remarks on the appropriation for fortifications. (Id. 722.) 

* April 5. — Remarks on the impeachment of Judge Peck. (Reg. 21 C. 
I s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. 2, 727-) 

* April 7. — Remarks on the impeachment of Judge Peck. (Reg. 21 C. 
I s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. 2. 746, 747, 748-74Q, 761.) 

* April 12. — Report on a bill concerning the terms and compensation of 
United States district judges. (House Report 355, 21 C. i s.) 

April 14. — Votes against engrossing for a third reading the bill concern- 
ing the Buffalo and New Orleans Road. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829-1830, VI., 
pt. 2, 790.) 

* April 15. — Remarks on a motion to reconsider the vote on the Buffalo 
and New Orleans Road Bill. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. 2, 803.) 

April 21. — Moves that the House resolve itself into Committee of the 
Whole. Motion carried. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. 2, 810.) 



Reg.=Register of Debates. — C.=Congress.— s.=session.— *=Printed herein. 



xxxii TIIK WORK'S OK JAMES BmiAXAX 

Moves to take up the report of the Committee on the Judiciary in the 
case of Judge Peck. (Id. 8io.) 

♦Speech on the report. (Id., appended, 1-5.) 

.■lf>ril 24. — Calls for the yeas and nays on a resolution for the impeach- 
ment of Judge Peck. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. 2, 818.) 

Votes in favor of the resolution. (Id. 818.) 

* Motion for the appointment of a committee to impeach Judge Peck 
before the Senate Committee appointed. (Id. 819.) 

* April 26. — Message to the Senate on the impeachment of Judge Peck. 
(Reg. 21 C. I s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. I. 383.) 

* April 27. — Remarks on a bill for the punishment of crimes in the 
District of Columbia. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. 2, 822, 824.) 

* April 29. — Report of an article of impeachment of Judge Peck. (Reg. 
21 C. I s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. 2, 863; id., pt. I. 411-413; House Report 383. 
21 C. I s.) 

* April 30. — Motion to commit the article of impeachiiieiit of Judge 
Peck to the Senate. (Reg. 21 C i s. 1H29-1830, VI.. pt. 2, 866.) 

* .l/(i,V I. — Action on the impeachment of Judge Peck. Motion made 
thereon. Appointed a member of the committee. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829-18^0. 
VI.. pt. 2, 868-869.) 

* May 4. — Presentation to the Senate of the article of impeachment of 
Judge Peck. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829-1S30. VI., pt. i. 411-413.) 

* Report of presentation of the article of impeachment to the Senate. 
(Id., pt. 2. 872.) 

* May II. — Proposes a substitute for the bill to amend the tariff laws, and 
makes remarks thereon. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829-1830, \'I., pt. 2, 964, 965.) 

May 12. — Makes remarks during consideration of the bill to amend the 
tariff laws. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. 2. 977, 978.) 

Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 979.) 

May 13. — Votes in favor of the passage of the bill to amend the tariff 
laws. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1S29-1830, VI., pt. 2, 987.) 

May 14. — Votes in favor of laying on the table the bill concerning naviga- 
tion and imposts. (Reg. 21 C. i s. 1829-1830, VI., pt. 2, 993.) 

December 9. — Votes against an amendment to a resolution referring that 
part of the President's message relating to the public debt and the revenue 
to the Committee of Ways and Means, so as to refer that part relating to 
the Bank of the United States to a select committee. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 18^0- 
1831. VII. 354-) 

* December 10. — Motion for a meeting of the House to make preliminary 
arrangements for Judge Peck's trial. Motion adopted. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 
1830-1831. VII. 3.^4) 

* December 13. — Report of the replication to Judge Peck's plea. (Reg. 
21 C 2 -s. 1830-1831, VII. 354-3.^5> 

Votes against a resolution to inquire into the expediency of repealing 
the duties on sugar. (Id. 353.) 

* Resolution to inform the Senate regarding the impeachment proceedings 
against Judge Peck. (Id. 336.) 

* Remarks on the iini)eachment of Judge Peck. (Id. 357.) 

* Presentation to the Senate of the replication in the case of Judge 
Peck. (Id. 4) 

December 14. — Votes against a resolution instructing the Committee of 
Wavs and Means to report a bill reducing the duties on various articles. 
(Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831. VII. 330.) 

Hecember 16. — Votes in favor of laying on the table a propo.sed resolu- 

Ki-R k<-i:istiT III l)fl)atr '" 'iiiiKrcss. — s. session. — ' I'rititctI lu-rriii. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: HOUSE, 1831 xxxiii 

tion for the appointment of a select committee on education. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 
1830-183 1, VII. 364.) 

December 17. — Report from the Committee on the Judiciary, of which 
Buchanan was a member, on the laws relating to copyright. (House Report 
3, 21 C. 2 s.) 

* Remarks on a bill to establish certain post routes and to discontinue 
others. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 369.) 

December 20. — Remarks on the attendance of the House at the trial of 
Judge Peck before the Senate. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 378.) 

Appears in the Senate, as a court of impeachment, ready to proceed 
with the trial of Judge Peck. (Id. 19.) 

'^December 23. — Motion as to the attendance of the House at the trial of 
Judge Peck. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 383.) 

Argues before the High Court of Impeachment in the case of Judge 
Peck, as to the admissibility of certain evidence. (Id. 19.) 

December 27. — Motion as to the attendance of the House at the trial of 
Judge Peck. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 384.) 

December 28. — Motion as to the attendance of the House at the trial of 
Judge Peck. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 386.) 

December 29. — Remarks on the proceedings in the case of Judge Peck 
before the High Court of Impeachment. Rests the case of the United States. 
(Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 23, 24.) 

December 30. — Votes in favor of laying on the table a resolution relating 
to the mileage of members of Congress. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 

39I-) 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES (Continued), 1831. 

* January 4, 1831. — Remarks on the attendance of the House at the trial 
of Judge Peck. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 399.) 

January 14. — Votes against Hall's amendment to the proposed resolution 
relating to the mileage of members of Congress. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, 
VII. 510.) 

* Moves the consideration of the bill for the relief of insolvent debtors. 
(Id. 510.) 

January 18. — Remarks on the trial of Judge Peck. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830- 

1831, VII. 33-34.) 

* January 24. — Reports on the bill to repeal section 25 of the Judiciary 
Act of September 4, 1789. Mr. Davis' majority report. Mr. Buchanan's 
minority report. (House Report 43, 21 C. 2 s. ; Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, 
VII. 532; id., Appendix, Ixxvii-lxxxvi.) 

Submission of reports. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 532.) 

* January 2$. — Remarks on consideration of the bill to repeal the 25th 
section of the Judiciary Act. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 533.) 

* Presents minority report from the Committee on the Judiciary on the 
bill. (Id. 5.35.) 

* January 28-29. — Argument, in the Senate, for the conviction of Judge 
Peck. (Arthur J. Stansbury, Report of the Trial of James H. Peck, 425-473; 
Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831. VI. 40-41- 44-) 

January 29. — Votes in favor of the rejection of the bill to repeal the 
25th section of the Judiciary Act of September 4, 1789. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830- 
1831, VII. 542.) 

January 31. — Remarks in support of a bill for the relief of James 
Monroe. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 546-) 

February i. — Votes against an amendment to the bill for the relief of 
James Monroe. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 568.) 



Reg.=Register of Debates.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 

iii 



xxxiv llli: WORKS OK JAMES BUCIIAXAX 

* February 2. — Remarks on the bill for the relief of James Monroe. 
(Reg. 21 C. _' s. 1830-1831, VII. 574-) 

February 3. — Votes in favor of ordering to be engrossed for a third read- 
ing the bill for the relief of James Monroe. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 

February 4. — V^otes in favor of the passage of the bill for the relief of 
James Monroe. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831. VII. 614.) 

* February 7. — Remarks against a motion to print 3,000 additional copies 
of tiie majority and minority reports on the que.stion of repealing section 25 
of the Judiciary Act of 1789. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 620.) 

* February 8. — Remarks on a motion to strike from the General Appro- 
priation Bill an appropriation for the salary of the minister to Russia. (Reg. 
_.i C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 654-656.) 

Report from the Committee on the Judiciary, rejecting the memorial of 
William A. Tennille. (House Report 72, 21 C. 2 .s.) 

February 9. — Votes in favor of putting the main question of engrossing 
for a third reading the General .Appropriation Rill. ( Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830- 

1831. VII. 677.) 

* Remarks on the bill for the relief of insolvent debtor.s. Moves that 
the House go into Committee of the Whole to consider the bill. Moves an 
amendment appropriating $5,000 to carry the bill into effect. (Id. 678.) 

February 11. — Remarks and motion on a bill to extend further the patent 
of Samuel Browning. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 679. 680.) 

Moves tliat the Committee of the Whole rise, and report to the House 
the bill to compensate Susan Decatur, widow of Captain Stephen Decatur. 
(Id. 681.) 

Votes in favor of engrossing the latter bill for a third reading. (Id. 681.) 

February 14. — Votes in favor of considering a motion to refer certain 
memorials to the Committee on Indian Affairs, with instructions to report a 
bill concerning relations with the Indians. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-183 1. VII. 

684.) 

February 15. — Votes in favor of ordering to be engrossed for a third 
reading the bill for the relief of Susan Decatur. The bill was again rejected. 
(Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-183T, VII. 718.) 

February 16. — Votes in favor of ordering to be engrossed for a third 
reading the bill for the relief of officers and soldiers of the Revolution. 
(Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 730.) 

February 18.— Votes in favor of ordering to be engrossed for a third 
reading the bill for improving the navigation of rivers and harbors, etc. 
(Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 755) 

February 22. — Moves the printing of 3.000 additional copies of the reports 
of a committee on foreign and United States coins. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830- 

1831. VII. 775) 

Votes in favor of ordering to be engrossed for a third reading the bill 
for the erection of an armory on the Western waters. (Id. 778.) 

* Remarks on the bill for the relief of certain insolvent debtors of the 
United States. (Id. 7/8-780.) 

Moves an amendment to the Insolvent Dcl)tors Bill, appropriating $3,000 
for the expenses of the act; which is agreed to. (Id. 781.) 

February 23. — Remarks on a bill for the preparation of a code of statute 
laws for the District of Columbia. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831. VII. 786.) 

February 24. — Remarks on a bill for carrying on certain roads and works 
of internal improvement, with reference to a motion to strike out the appro- 
priation for surveys. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, \'II. 780 ) 



Reg.— Register of Debates.— C. ConRress.— s. session.— •--Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1834 xxxv 

Votes against the motion to strike out this appropriation. The motion 
was defeated. (Id. 789.) 

February 26. — Votes in favor of the passage of a bill for a subscription 
to a compilation of Congressional documents. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, 
VII. 320.) 

* February 28. — Remarks on the Indian question, during the consideration 
of the Indian Appropriation Bill. (Reg. 21 C. 2 s. 1830-1831, VII. 827.) 

SENATE, 1834. 

December 8, 1834. — The Chair communicates to the Senate the credentials 
of James Buchanan, elected a Senator by the Pennsylvania Legislature, to 
supply the vacancy occasioned by the resignation of William Wilkins. (G. 
23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, n. 17; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. I, 5.) 

December 15.— Appears as a Senator from Pennsylvania, qualifies, and 
takes his seat. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 36; Reg. 2t, C. 2 s. 1834-1835, 
XL, pt. I. 7.) 

December 16. — Appointed a Senate member of the joint committee of 
the two Houses on arrangements on the occasion of General Lafaj-ette's 
death. (Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. i, 7.) 

December 22. — Presents petitions. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 53.) 

December 27. — Moves that the petition of Thomas Anderson be referred 
to the Committee on Foreign Relations. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. yj.) 

SENATE (Continued), 1835. 

January 2. 1835. — Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading a bill 
to exempt merchandise imported under certain circumstances from the opera- 
tion of the Tariff Act of 1828. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 86; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 
1834-1835, XL, pt. I. 83.) 

Votes against engrossing for a third reading a bill for the improvement 
of the Wabash River. (Id. 87; id. 89.) 

* January 5. — Remarks on the bill to exempt merchandise imported under 
certain circumstances from the operation of the Tariff Act of 1828. (G. 23 
C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 92; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. i, 92-93.) 

January 6. — Presents a petition or memorial. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, 
11. 95.) 

Votes against a motion to print 20,000 copies of a report of the Committee 
on Foreign Relations upon relations with France. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-183=;, 
II. 96; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. I, 108.) 

January 7. — Votes against the passage of the bill for the improvement of 
the Wabash River. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 102; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834- 
1835, XL, pt. I, 1 14.) 

January 14. — Presents a petition or memorial. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835 
IL 123.) 

Remarks on a resolution concerning relations with France. (G. 23 C. 
2 s. 1834-1835, II. 125, 126; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. I, 206-208, 210, 
213.) 

Votes in favor of a resolution declaring it inexpedient to adopt any 
legislative measures in regard to the state of affairs between the United 
States and France. (Id. 127; id. 215.) 

January 15. — Remarks on a proposed amendment to the Constitution in 
relation to the election of President and Vice-President. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834- 
1835, II. 129; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. I, 217.) 



Re,s:.=Reg:ister of Debates. — G.=Congressional Globe. — C.=Congress. — s.=session. 
*=Printed herein. 



xxxvi Tin: WOItKS OF JAMES IU( IIANAX 

Remarks on a joint resolution authoriziiip tlie sale of certain animals 
presented to the President by the Emperor of Morocco. (Id. 129; id. 218.) 

January 16. — Votes on various amendments to a bill for completing a 
certain road in Alabama. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835. II. 132.) 

January 18. — Votes against ordering to be engrossed for a third reading 
a bill for the relief of the legal representatives of Moses Shepherd. (G. 23 C. 
2 s. 1834-1835, II. 138; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XI., pt. I, 224.) 

January 19. — Remarks on a bill authorizing Alabama to apply the two 
per cent, fund arising from the sale of public lands in that State, reserved for 
roads in Alabama, to education. (Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XI., pt. 1, 231- 
232. ) 

January 20. — Votes in favor of recommitting, with instructions, the bill 
for the relief of the heirs of Moses Shepherd. (G. 23 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 142; 
Reg. 23 C. 2 s. i834-if^3.S. XI.. pt. i, 234.) 

January 23. — Votes in favor of engrossing for a tlnrd reading a bill for 
the relief of the heirs of Lucy Bond and Hannah Douglass. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 
1 834-1 835, II. 154.) 

January 28. — Votes against a motion to lay on the table resolutions of 
the Alaliama Legislature relative to the removal of public deposits from the 
I'.ank of the United States. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 177; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 
1834-1835. XL, pt. I, 268.) 

Votes against a motion to print 20,000 copies of the report of the 
Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads. (Id. 177; id. 272.) 

Votes in favor of ordering to be engrossed for a third reading the bill 
making compensation for French spoliations prior to 1800. (Id. 177; id. 272.) 

February 3. — Presents a memorial praying for an appropriation to im- 
prove the Monongahela River. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. i8g.) 

Votes in favor of the bill making compensation for French spoliations 
prior to 1800. (Id. 190; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. i, 282.) 

February 5. — Offers a resolution relating to the claim of Valentine 
Geisey, late superintendent of the Cumberland Road. The resolution was 
adopted. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 200.) 

Votes against ordering to be engrossed for a third reading a bill to pur- 
chase certain pictures for the President's house. The bill was rejected. 
(Id. 200; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. i, 313.) 

* February 6. — Remarks on a bill to change the organization of the 
General Post Office. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 206-207; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 
1834-1835. XL, pt. I, 343-344) 

February 7. — Votes against an amendment to the Post Office Bill, making 
it the duty of the Postmaster-General to contract for the carrying of a daily 
mail between New Orleans and Mobile. The amendment was rejected. 
(G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 210.) 

Votes in favor of an amendment to the Post Office Bill, providing that 
every post route should be separately bid for and a separate contract made. 
The amendment was agreed to. (Id. 211; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XI.. 
I)t. I. 338.) 

Remarks on an amendment to the Post Office Bill, providing that any 
bidder who failed to obtain the main route, but obtained a subordinate route, 
might give up the latter. (Id. 211; id. 3.38.) 

Votes against an amendment to the Post Office Bill, prohibiting mail 
contractors from running opposition passenger coaches on a route taken by 
a regular mail contractor. (Id. 211; id. 360.) 



RcR. RcRislcrof Debates.— C. Congressional Globe.— C. ^Congress.— s.-^session. 
•—Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1835 xxxvii 

Votes in favor of engrossing the Post Office Bill for a third reading. 
(Id. 211 ; id. 360.) 

February g. — Votes in favor of a motion to print lo.ooo copies of a 
report on executive patronage. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 221 ; Reg. 23 C 
2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt I, 392.) 

* February lo. — Remarks on an amendment to the bill fixing the number 
and salaries of custom-house officers, increasing the salary of the Collector 
at Sandusky from $400 to $600 per annum. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 224; 
Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835. XL, pt. I, 398.) 

February 11. — Presents a petition or memorial. (G. 2^ C. 2 s. 1834-1835, 
II. 226.) 

* Remarks on a bill for the continuation and repair of the Cumberland 
Road. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1S35, II. 227-228, 228, 228-229; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 
1834-1835, XL, pt. I, 400-402, 405-406, 411-412.) 

Votes against a motion to strike out the second and third sections of 
the Cumberland Road Bill, providing for an appropriation of $346,000 to 
repair the road east of Ohio, and for the retrocession of the road when 
completed. (Id. 229; id. 413.) 

February 13. — Votes in favor of sustaining the decision of the Chair as to 
the propriety of certain remarks made by Colonel Benton during a debate on 
the bill to repeal the act of 1820 limiting the terms of civil officers. (Reg. 
23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. I, 432.) 

February 14. — Remarks on a bill to repeal the first two sections of the 
act of 1820 limiting the terms of civil officers. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-183.S, II. 
243; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835. XL, pt. I, 455.) 

February 16. — Votes against engrossing the above bill for a third reading. 
(G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 251 ; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. i, 491.) 

* February 17. — Speech on the above bill. (Reg. 23 C. 2 s. XL, pt. i, 
495-503; G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835. 11- 256.) 

February 18. — Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading a bill to 
grant a township of land to certain exiles from Poland. It was so ordered. 
(G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 260; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. i, 513.) 

February 19. — Votes against engrossing for a third reading a bill for the 
relief of Charles J. Catlett, for property destroyed by British troops during the 
War of 1812. The bill was rejected. (G. 23 C 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 265; Reg. 
23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. I. 536.) 

Introduces a bill to suspend further the operation of certain provisions 
of the Tariff Act of 1834. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 265.) 

February 20. — Remarks on an amendment to the bill to repeal the first 
two sections of the act of 1820, so as to provide that deliberations of the 
Senate on nominations shall be with open doors. Votes against the amend- 
ment, which was rejected. (G. 23 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 273: Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 
1834-1835, XL, pt. I, 571.) 

* February 21. — Remarks on a memorial of citizens of Massachusetts 
praying the passage of a non-intercourse law with France. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 

1834-1835, n. 276.) 

Votes against the passage of the bill to repeal the first two sections of 
the act of 1820, limiting the terms of certain civil officers. The bill was 
passed. (Id. 276; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. i, 576.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to postpone the consideration of the bill to 
establish branches of the United States Mint. (Id. 276; id. 580.) 

Votes in favor of recommitting the bill to the Committee on Finance. 
(Id. 276; id. 580.) 



Reg.=Register of Debates.— G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress. 
*=Printed herein. 



xxxviii THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

Votes in favor of postponing the bill. (Id. 276; id. 580.) 

Votes on various amendments to the bill reducing the salaries of certain 
ofiicers in branch mints. (Id. 276, 277; id. 581.) 

Offers a resolution to inquire into the expediency of repairing Fort 
Mifflin and constructing pier batteries in the Delaware River. (Id. 277.) 

* February 23. — Remarks on a bill for the consolidation of certain United 
States circuit courts. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 280; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834- 
1835, XL, pt. I, 591-592.) 

Makes a motion to recommit the bill with instructions to amend it so 
as to create two new circuits. (Id. 280; id. 591.) 

Votes against an amendment to his motion. (Id. 281 ; id. 594.) 

Remarks on an amendment to the Fortifications Bill, providing for the 
repair of Fort Mifflin. (Id. 281.) 

Remarks on an amendment to the Fortifications Bill, increasing the appro- 
priation for Fort Delav.-are. (Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. i, 594.) 

February 24. — Presents a petition or memorial. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1831, 
II. 283.) 

Votes in favor of recommitting with instructions the bill for establishing 
branches of the United States Mint. Votes against the bill. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 
1834-1835, n. 285, 2S6; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. I, 613.) 

Votes in favor of the bill for the consolidation of certain United States 
circuit courts, as reported by the Judiciary Committee in accordance with 
the instructions of the Senate. (Id. 286; id. 614.) 

February 25.— Remarks on a bill for the benefit of the cities of Washing- 
ton, Georgetown, and Alexandria, D. C. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 289: 
Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. I, 618.) 

Votes in favor of the engrossment of the bill for a third reading. It was 
so ordered. (Id. 289; id. 619.) 

Moves an amendment to the bill regulating the deposit of public money 
in State banks so as to strike out the half from the provision of two and a 
half per cent., the sum to be paid for the use of public monev deposited. 
(Id. 289; id. 621.) 

Remarks on the bill. (Id. 289; id. 621.) 

February 26. — Votes in favor of an amendment to the bill regulating 
the deposit of public money, providing that each bank of deposit should render 
the same services to the Government as were rendered by the Bank of the 
United States. The amendment was adopted. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 
296; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. I, 623.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill, requiring the monthly returns 
to be made by the deposit banks to be communicated to Congress. (Id. 296; 
id. 623.) 

* Remarks on an amendment to the bill, requiring deposit banks to have 
on hand an amount of specie and specie-paying bank-notes equal to one-fourth 
of their liabilities. Votes against the amendment, which was rejected. Votes 
in favor of an amendment requiring one-fifth, which amendment was agreed 
to. (Id. 297-298; id. 629.) 

Remarks against the l)ill. (Id. 296-297; id. 629-630.) 

Votes against engrossing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 298; id. 630.) 

February 27. — Votes against the passage of the bill to regulate the 
deposit of public money in the State banks. The bill was passed. (G. 23 C. 
2 s. 1834-1835. IT. 300; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. i. 660.) 

February 28. — Votes against proceeding with the election of a public 
printer. (G. 23 C 2 s. ■ 1834-1835, II. 308; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, 
pt. I, 697.) 



Rep. ^ Register of Debates.— G.=Congiessional Globe.— C.=^Congress.—s.=session. 
*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1835 xxxlx 

Votes in favor of postponing the subject. (Id. 308; id. 697, 698.) 

March 2. — Remarks on a resolution with regard to furnishing Senators 

with Gales and Seaton's Register of Debates. (Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, 

pt. I, 700, 701 ; G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 314, 315.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to consider the resolution. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834- 

1835, II. 314.) Votes in favor of an amendment to furnish each Senator with 

the volumes published since the last distribution, which was agreed to. (Id. 

314.) Votes in favor of the resolution, which was adopted. (Id. 314.) 

* Remarks on an amendment to the General Appropriation Bill, to strike 
out the salary and outfit of a minister to Great Britain. (Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 
1834-1835, XI., pt. I, 703-704; G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 315.) 

Votes against the amendment. (Id. 714.) 

Votes aye on the adoption of the report of a select committee that no 
suspicion existed that General Poindexter was concerned in an attempted 
assassination of the President. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 315; Reg. 23 C. 
2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. I, 714.) 

Remarks on an amendment to the General Appropriation Bill, in favor 
of certain custom-house officers. Votes in favor of the amendment, which 
was agreed to. (Id. 315; id. 714.) 

Votes in favor of taking up for consideration the resolution for expunging 
from the journal of the Senate the resolution condemning the President. (Id. 
315; id. 715-) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill making appropriations for the 
Delaware breakwater and for certain harbors, adding an appropriation of 
$10,000 for the construction of a harbor at Michigan City. (Id. 317; id. 716.) 

March 3. — Votes in favor of taking up the consideration of the resolution 
for expunging from the journal of the Senate the resolution condemning the 
President. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 324; Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, 
pt. I, 723.) 

Participates in a discussion on the foregoing resolution. (Id. 324; 
id. 725-) 

Votes in favor of an amendment to the resolution, to the effect that the 
resolution of March 28, 1834, should be "rescinded, repealed, reversed, and 
declared null and void," instead of expunged. (Id. 325; id. 726.) Votes 
against a motion to table the whole subject. (Id. 325; id. 72J.) 

Votes against a motion to print 5,000 additional copies of a report on 
the subject of frauds in the sales of public lands. (Id. 325; id. 728.) 

Votes against an amendment to the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Bill, 
inserting an appropriation of $300,000. The amendment was lost. (Id. 325; 
id. 729.) 

* Remarks on an amendment to the Fortifications Bill, appropriating 
$3,000,000 for defence, provided there shall be necessity for it before the fol- 
lowing session of Congress. (Reg. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. I, 734-735; 
Niles' Weekly Register, March 21, 1835, XLVIII. 53 ; G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, 
IL 326.) 

Votes against the amendment. (G. 23 C. 2 s. 1834-1835, II. 326; Reg. 
27, C. 2 s. 1834-1835, XL, pt. I, 738.) 

December 7. — Appears as a Senator from Pennsylvania. (G. 24 C. i s. 
1835-1836, III. I.) 

December 16. — Receives 2 votes for the chairmanship of the Committee 
on Manufactures against Senator McKnight, who had 22 votes. (G. 24 C. 
I s. 1835-1836, III. 23.) 

On the election of chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, 



Reg.=Register of Debates. — G.=Congressional Globe. — C.=Congress. — s.=session. 
*=Printed herein. 



xl THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

Buchanan received i6 votes against 22 for Clayton. (Id. 24; Reg. 24 C. i s. 
1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 12.) 

December 17.— Elected a member of the Committee on the Judiciary. 
(G. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 26; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. i, 13.) 

* December 21.— Remarks on a motion to refer to a select committee that 
part of the President's message relating to the transmission through the mails 
of incendiary publications on slavery. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III 36; 
Reg. 24 C. 1 s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 28.) 

* December 22. — Remarks on a motion to receive the Senators from 
Michigan as spectators until a decision on the application of that State for 
admission. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 43; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., 
pt. I, 41.) 

December 24. — Presents a petition of Pennsylvania citizens as to the 
importation of iron. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 49.) 

December 29. — Votes in favor of a resolution to supply Senators with 
the usual newspapers. (Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. i, 54.) 

December 30. — Moves to grant leave to Thomas W. Anderson to with- 
draw his petition from the Senate files. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 58.) 

SENATE (Continued), 1836. 

* January 4, 1836. — Remarks on the Judicial System Bill. (G. 24 C. i s. 
1835-1836, III. 66, 67; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 59, 62.) 

Votes against an amendment as to the second judicial district. (Id. 67; 
id. 63.) 

* January 5. — Moves amendments to the Judicial System Bill. (G. 24 C. 
I s. 1835-1836, III. 68; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. i, 68.) 

January 6. — Report on the memorial of James Smith. (G. 24 C. i s. 
1835-1836, III. 70.) 

Votes aye on the passage of the Judicial System Bill. (Id. 70; Reg. 
24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I. 65.) 

* Remarks on a proposed resolution concerning the regulation of the 
Senate Chamber and galleries. (Id. 72; id. 70.) 

Votes against an amendment allowing each Senator to admit into the 
circular gallery a [blank] number of persons. (Id. ■/2\ id. 71.) 

Votes for an amendment opening the circular gallery to spectators. 
Votes in favor of an amendment allowing each Senator to admit a number of 
persons into the lobby of the Senate. (Id. 72; id. 71.) 

Votes in favor of the resolution as amended. (Id. 72; id. 72.) 

* January 7. — Remarks on petitions for the abolition of slavery in the 
District of Columbia. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 76-77; Reg. 24 C. i s. 
1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 82-85.) 

Moves that the whole subject be postponed. (Id. 77; id. 85.) 
January 11. — Presents a memorial of citizens of Philadelphia for the 
erection of certain piers and light-houses. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 83.) 

* Remarks on a memorial presented by him for the abolition of slavery 
in the District of Columbia. (Id. 83 ; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. i, 99.) 

Votes against engrossing for a third reading the bill to repeal the ist 
and 2d sections of an act to limit the terms of certain civil officers. (Id. 
84; id. 104.) 

* January 13. — Remarks on a bill for the relief of sufferers by the fire 
at New York on December 16, 1835. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 99; Reg. 
24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 125-126.) 



Reg.=Registcr of Debates. — G.=Congressional Globe. — C.=Congre9S. — s.=session. 
*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1836 xli 

Votes against a proposal to strike out a clause for the extension of 
payment of certain bonds given for duties at the port of New York. (Id. lOo; 
id. 129.) 

Remarks on an amendment to the bill. (Id. lOo; id. 129.) 

* January 18. — Remarks on the President's messages relating to affairs 
with France. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 113-114, 115; Reg. 24 C. i s 
1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 168-169, 177-178.) 

Presents a memorial from insurance interests in Philadelphia, in relation 
to New Castle. (Id. 115.) 

January 19. — Moves that the petition presented by him praying for the 
abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, and his motion to reject 
it, be taken up for consideration. IMotion agreed to. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, 
III. 122; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 209.) 

January 20. — Moves that the Senate proceed to the consideration of 
executive business. Motion carried. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 125; Reg. 
24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 233.) 

January 21. — Moves that when the Senate adjourn, it adjourn to the 
Monday following. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 127.) 

January 25. — Presents memorials concerning improvements in the Dela- 
ware River, and the abolition of slaverv in the District of Columbia. (G. 24 
C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 136.) 

January 26. — Votes on a motion to refer a petition from the Michigan 
Legislature for the admission of that State into the Union. (G. 24 C. i s. 
1835-1836, III. 141 ; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 289.) 

January 28. — Remarks on a petition for the abolition of slavery in the 
District of Columbia. Moves to lay the question on the table, which was 
agreed to. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 147; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., 
pt. I, 302-303.) 

February i. — Presents a memorial for the importation of a church bell 
free of duty. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 156.) 

* February 1-2. — Speech on a resolution for appropriating the surplus 
revenue to the national defence. (G. 24 C. i s. III., Appendix, 60-70; G. 24 
C. I s. III. 157, 160; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 325-356.) 

February 3. — Remarks during the discussion on the foregoing resolution. 
(G. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III., Appendix, 72.) 

February 4. — Introduces a resolution concerning the regulations as to 
the use of the circular lobby of the Senate. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 
165.) 

February 9. — Presents a memorial for the removal of negroes to Africa. 
Makes remarks and motions concerning this memorial. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835- 
1836, III. 173; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 442.) 

Presents the petition of Elizabeth Flicker, widow of Henry Richardson, 
for relief. (Id. 173.) 

Remarks on the resolution for appropriating the surplus revenue to the 
national defence. (Id., Appendix, 80.) 

* February 12. — Remarks on a memorial for the abolition of slavery in the 
District of Columbia. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III., Appendix, 93-94; Reg. 
24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 496: G. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 180.) 

Moves that when the Senate adjourn, it adjourn to the Monday follow- 
ing. (Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 497.) 

February 15. — Presents a memorial for the increase of the salaries of 
inspectors of the port of Philadelphia. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 185.) 



Reg.=Register of Debates.— G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session. 
*= Printed herein. 



xUi THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

February i6. — Makes a report from the Committee on the Judiciary on 
the petition of Thomas Tenant. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 188.) 

Remarks on a resokition relating to the admission of ladies into the 
Senate circular lobby. (Id. 188; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. i, 531.) 

Votes against striking out the clause which allows each Senator to admit 
three persons. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 188.) 

Votes against an amendment that the circular gallery be appropriated to 
ladies and to gentlemen accompanying them. (Id. 188; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1833- 
1836, XII., pt. I, 532.) 

Votes in favor of the original resolution. (Id. 188; id. 532.) 

February 18. — Votes against laying on the table the resolution ft)r 
appropriating the surplus revenue to the national defence. Votes against a 
motion to strike out the word "surplus." (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 192, 
193; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 572.) 

Remarks on the resolution. (Id., Appendix, 117; id. 576; G. 24 C. i s. 

1835-1836, III. 193- ) 

February 19. — Presents the petition of Russell Jarvis for an appropriation 
for testing an invention. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 197.) 

Votes against third reading of a bill for the relief of Moses Shepherd. 
(Id. 198; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 580.) 

February 22. — Moves the printing of 5,000 extra copies of the President's 
message on the mediation of Great Britain in the disagreement with France, 
which was agreed to. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 200; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835- 
1836, XII., pt. I, 590.) 

February 25. — Remarks on taking up a memorial on the abolition of 
slavery. (Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. i, 615.) 

Moves to consider executive business, which was agreed to. (Id. 615.) 

* February 26. — Remarks on the bill for the continuation of the Cumber- 
land Road in Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 208. 
Appendix, 165: Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 4, 4633-4635, pt. i. 635.) 

February 29. — Presents memorials for a light-house on the New Jersey 
coast. (G. 24 C. I s. III. 213.) 

* Remarks on a memorial of the Society of Friends of Lancaster County, 
Pennsylvania, for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. (Id.. 
Appendix, 135, 323.) 

'■''March i. — Remarks on a report concerning the Ohio and Michigan 
boundary. (G. 24 C. i s. III. 215; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. i, 664.) 

* March 2. — Speech in opposition to Calhoun's motion against the recep- 
tion of the petition of the Society of Friends of Lancaster County, Pennsyl- 
vania, and in support of his own motion to reject the prayer of the petitioners. 
(G. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 219, Appendix, 181-185 ; Reg. 24 C. i s. XII., 
pt. I, 679-690.) 

March 4. — Votes on various amendments to the Cumberland Road Bi'l, 
substituting an appropriation of $100,000 instead of $350,000 for the road in 
Indiana. The amendment was rejected. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 225; 
Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 7-24. 725) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill, substituting $200,000 instead of 
$320,000 for the road in Ohio. The amendment was agreed to. (Id. 226; id. 
721.) 

Votes against an amendment to limit the purposes of the appropriation 
for the road in Illinois. The amendment was agreed to. (Id. 227; id. 724.) 

Votes against an amendment appropriating $150,000 for the repair of 



Reg. = Register of Debates.— G.=Coiigressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session. 
*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1836 xliii 

the road from Chattahoochie to Chotocton, and from Mobile to New Orleans. 
(Id. 227; id. 725.) 

March 7. — Presents the petition of John Gardner for compensation for 
horses lost in the War of 1812. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 229.) 

March 9. — Votes in favor of reception of the petition of the Society of 
Friends of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, for the abolition of slavery in the 
District of Columbia. The question was decided affirmatively. (G. 24 C. I s. 
1835-1836, III. 239; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 779.) 

* Remarks on an amendment concerning the abolition of slavery in the 
District of Columbia. (Id. 239-240: id. 780-781.) 

March 10. — Moves to refer the President's message relating to the forma- 
tion of a constitution and State government for the Territory of Arkansas 
to a select committee of five. The motion was carried. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835- 
1836, III. 240; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 782.) 

Votes in favor of laying on the table a motion to take up the bill 
relating to the boundary between Ohio and Michigan. (Id. 241 ; id. 785.) 

Votes against a motion to lay on the table the subject of the petition of 
the Society of Friends, and Clay's amendment to the motion to reject the 
prayer. (Id. 242; id. 787.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill relating to the boundary between 
Ohio and Michigan, giving assent to the boundary fixed in the constitution 
of Ohio. The amendment was rejected. Votes in favor of engrossing the 
bill for a third reading. (Id. 242; id. 7QQ.) 

March 11. — Presents the petition of Brigadier-General John P. de Haas. 
(G. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 245.) 

Votes on various amendments to the Cumberland Road Bill. (Id. 246; 
Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. r, 802, 803.) 

Votes in favor of ordering the bill to be engrossed for a third reading, 
which was done. (Id. 247; id. 803.) 

Votes against two amendments to his motion to reject the prayer of the 
petition of the Society of Friends, of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, for the 
abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, declaring legislation on th*^ 
subject inexpedient. The amendments were rejected. (Id. 247; id. 804.) 
Votes in favor of his motion to reject the prayer, which was carried. (Id. 
248; id. 810.) 

March 14. — Remarks on a motion to consider the bill to appropriate for 
a limited time the proceeds of sales of public lands. Votes against the 
motion. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 252; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII, 
pt. I. 810.) 

Moves the election of a select committee to consider the proposed consti- 
tution of Arkansas. Elected chairman of the committee. (Id. 252.) 

March 15. — Remarks on the motion to consider the bill to appropriate 
for a limited time the proceeds of sales of public lands. Votes against the 
motion. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 255; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., 
pt. I, 811.) 

Votes against a motion to adjourn. Remarks on the Land Bill. Move.' 
that the Senate proceed to consider executive business, which was agreed to. 
(Id. 255; id. 833.) 

March 16. — Presents petitions. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 258, 259.) 

March 21. — Lays on the table resolutions of the Pennsylvania Legislature 
relating to the proceeds of the sales of public lands, and for the defence of 
the country. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 271.) 



Re8:.=Reg-ister of Debates. — G.=Congressional Globe. — C.=Congress. — s.=session. 
*=Printed herein. 



xliv THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

March 22. — Reports a bill for the admission of Arkansas into the Union. 

(G. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 275; Reg. 24 C. I s. 183571836, XII., pt. i, 934.) 

Remarks on the question of the day for considering the bill. (Id. 275; 

id. 9.^4) 

March 23. — Presents a petition for the increase of salaries of custom- 
house officers of Philadelphia. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 280.) 

March 24. — Presents a petition for the refunding of certain duties paid 
by Morris Wain & Co., of Philadelphia. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 284.) 

Remarks on a joint resolution designating a day for the adjournment 
of Congress. (Id. 284; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. i, 963.) 

Votes against engrossment for a third reading of the bill for the relief 
of the corporate cities of the District of Columbia. (Id. 285; id. 964.) 

March 28. — Presents a petition for the erection of a new custom-house 
in Philadelphia. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 298.) 

Votes against the motion to lay on the table the resolution fixing a day 
of adjournment of Congress. Votes against an amendment to the resolution 
fixing May 20th. Votes against an amendment making the 23rd day of 
May the day of adjournment. Votes in favor of the resolution as amended, 
which was adopted. (Id. 299; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. i. 981.) 

* Remarks on an amendment to the Revolutionary Pensioners Bill con ■ 
cerning specie payments. (Id. 299, Appendix. 239-240; id. 1004, 1005.) 

* March 30. — Remarks on the bill to establish the northern boundary of 
Ohio, and to provide for the admission of Michigan. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836. 
III. 306, Appendix, 309-310, where date is erroneously given as April i, 183^ ; 
Reg. 24 C I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, T011-1015.) 

March 31. — Participates in a debate on bills relating to public lands. 
(Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 1031.) 

Votes against a motion to refer the bills to the Committee on Public 
Lands. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 310; Reg. 24 C i s. 1835-1836, XII., 
pt. I, 1032.) 

* April I. — Speech in reply to arguments against the admission of Michi- 
gan into the Union. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 311, 312, Appendix, 397- 
400; Reg. 24 C I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 1037-1046.) 

Votes against motions to adjourn. (Id. 311, 312; id. 1046.) 
Votes on various amendments to the bill providing for the admission 
of Michigan. Votes in favor of ordering the bill to be engrossed for a 
third reading, which was directed. (Id. 311-312; id. 1046-1048.) 

April 2. — Votes against a motion to recommit the bill to establish the 
northern boundary of Ohio, and to provide for the admission of Michigan. 
Votes against a motion to lay the bill on the table. Votes against a motion 
to adjourn, which was lost. Votes in favor of the bill, which was passed. 
(G. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 2>'^3\ Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836. XII., pt. r, 1050.) 

* Moves that the Senate take up the consideration of the bill for the 
admission of Arkansas. Votes against motions to adjourn. Remarks on 
the bill. (Id. 313-314; id. 1052-1053.) 

* April 4. — Remarks on the bill for the admission of Arkansas. (G. 24 C. 
I s. 1835-1836, III. 315-316; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 1053-1054.) 

Votes in favor of the bill, which was passed. (Id. 316; id. 1056.) 
April 13. — Presents several memorials and petitions. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835- 
1836, III. 35I-) 

April 14. — Motion, and remarks thereon, to appoint a committee of con- 
ference on the disagreement of the two Houses as to the amendment to the 
bill establishing the territorial government of Wisconsin, which reduces the 



Re?.=Register of Debates.— G.=^Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session. 
*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1836 xlv 

salary of the Governor. Appointed chairman of the committee. (G. 24 C. 
I s. 1835-1836, III. 358; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, II77-) 

April 18. — Report of the conference committee on the disagreement of the 
two Houses on the foregoing amendment. Moves that the Senate recede from 
its disagreement to the amendment, and the question was decided in the 
affirmative. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 370; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., 
pt. I, 1 199.) 

* Remarks on a bill to authorize contracts for transportation of United 
States mail and property on railroads. (Id. 372; id. 1203-1205.) 

April 20. — Presents the petition of Colonel Jacob Slough, for increase 
of pension. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 378.) 

April 22. — Remarks on the bill for the relief of the legal representatives 
of the widows of Colonels Bond and Douglass. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 
384; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 1253.) 

Votes against the bill. (Id. 384; id. 1254.) 

* April 25. — Presents a petition of the Society of Friends, of Philadelphia, 
remonstrating against the admission of Arkansas while the bill contained the 
provision in relation to slavery. Remarks on the subject. Moves to lay the 
petition on the table, which was agreed to. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 395 ; 
Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. I, 1277-1278.) 

Submits a resolution of inquiry into the expediency of contracting with 
Luigi Persico for two groups of statues. (G. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 395.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill concerning the proceeds of sales 
of public lands, changing the ratio of distribution. (Id. 398; Reg. 24 C. i s. 
1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1286.) 

April 26. — Votes in favor of an amendment to the Naval Appropriations 
Bill, increasing the appropriation for the pay of the Navy. (G. 24 C. I s. 
1835-1836, III. 403; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1299.) 

Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 403-) 

Votes against postponing consideration of the bill to distribute the 
proceeds of sales of public lands. (Id. 403; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., 
pt. 2, 1301.) Votes against laying the bill on the table. (Id. 403; id. 1302.) 

Votes on various amendments to the bill. Votes in favor of engrossing 
the bill for a third reading, which was ordered. (Id. 403-404; Appendix, 
317, 318, 319. 321; id. 1305-1306, 1308, 1313.) 

* April 28. — Moves to take up the resolution as to contracting with 
Luigi Persico for two groups of statues. Remarks on the subject. (G. 24 C. 
I s. 1835-1836, III. 406-407; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1314-1315, 

1315-1317-) 

The resolution was agreed to. (Id. 408; id. 1318.) 

April 29. — Votes against a motion that when the Senate adjourn, it 
adjourn till the Tuesday following. Remarks on a motion that when Senate 
adjourn, it adjourn till the Monday following. Votes against this motion. 
(G. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 411 ; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, I374-) 

April 30. — Remarks on a bill relating to the bequest of James Smithson. 
Votes in favor of ordering the bill to be engrossed for a third reading. (G. 
24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 413; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1377, 

1378.) 

May 2. — Remarks on a bill for the improvement of certain harbors and 
for making certain surveys. Votes against an appropriation for the Pearl and 
Pascagoula rivers, in Mississippi. Votes against an appropriation for remov- 
ing an obstruction in the Ohio River below Shippingport. Votes in favor 



Reg.=Register of Debates.— G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session. 
*=Printed herein. 



xlvi THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

of engrossing the bill for a third reading. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 415: 
Reg. 24 C I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1383-1384.) 

May 4. — Presents the presentment of the grand jury of the circuit court 
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, recommending the erection of a 
court-house and jail in Philadelphia. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 416.) 

* Remarks on a bill for the service of volunteers for the defence of the 
frontiers. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 416, Appendix, 406; Reg. 24 C. i s. 

1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1394-1395-) 

Votes in favor of passing the bill to distribute for a limited time the 
proceeds of sales of public lands among the States. (Id. 416; id. 1396.) 

May S- — Remarks on certain features of the General Appropriation Bill. 
(G. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 420, 421; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 
1402.) 

* May 9. — Remarks on memorials for the recognition of Texas and 
concerning Texan affairs. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 437-438; Reg. 24 C. 
I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1422-1424.) 

May II. — Presents the petition of Hannah Caldwell, praying for arrear- 
ages of pension. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 445-) 

May 12. — Reports a bill supplemental to the act for the admission of 
Arkansas. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 449-) 

Votes against a motion to lay the Fortifications Bill on the table. (Id. 
449; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1432.) 

^Remarks on the bill. (Id. 449-450; id. 1432-1433.) 

May 14. — Remarks on the bill for the relief of Richard C. Stockton, 
William B. Stokes, and others. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 458; Reg. 24 C. 
I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2. 1448-1449.) 

Votes against striking out the second section of the bill for the relief 
of the corporate cities of the District of Columbia. (Id. 459; id. 1452.) 

May 17. — Presents memorials for the acknowledgment of Texan inde- 
pendence. (G. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 464.) 

May 18. — Remarks on the postponement of a bill to authorize the Presi- 
dent to appoint three additional paymasters. (Reg. 24 C. i s. XII., pt. 2, 

1463-) 

May 19. — Appointed a member of the conference committee on the dis- 
agreement between the two Houses as to the bill for the services of volunteers 
for the defence of the frontiers. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 473; Reg. 24 C. 
I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1464.) 

* May 20. — Remarks on the disagreement of the two Houses. (G. 24 C. 
I s. 1835-1836, III. 478, 479; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1505-1506, 
1508-1510.) 

May 21. — Votes on various amendments to the Fortifications Bill. (G. 24 
C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 483; Reg. 24 C I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1524-1525.) 

* May 23. — Remarks on memorials presented for the recognition of the 
independence of Texas. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 489; Reg. 24 C. i s. 

1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1536-1537.) 

Presents a memorial from citizens of Pennsylvania for the recognition of 
Texan independence. (Id. 489.) 

May 24. — Votes on various amendments to the Fortifications Bill. (G. 24 
C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 493, 494; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1550.) 

May 25. — Votes on various amendments to the Fortifications Bill. (G. 24 

C I s. 1835-1836, III. 497, 498; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1575, 

1576.) 

Moves that the Senate take up the consideration of the bill supplementary 



Reg.=Register of Debates.— G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=sesslon. 
*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1836 xlvii 

to the act providing for the admission of Arkansas. Moves an amendment to 
the bill, which was agreed to. (Id. 498; id. 1577.) 

May 26. — Votes in favor of the passage of the Fortifications Bill. (G. 24 
C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 505; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1592.) 

* May 28. — Remarks on the bill to regulate the deposits of public money, 
and on an amendment as to the sum always to be kept in the Treasury. 
(G. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 509, Appendix, 424-426; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835- 
1836, XII., pt. 2, 1635-1641.) 

May 31. — Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading a bill to reward 
the captors of the frigate Philadelphia. (Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., 
pt. 2, 1649.) 

Remarks on a bill to establish a day for the annual meeting of Congress. 
(G. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 513.) 

Appointed a member of a select committee to which was referred the bill 
to regulate the deposits of public money. (Id. 514; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, 
XII., pt. 2, 1657.) 

Votes in favor of taking up the bill to increase the military peace estab- 
lishment. (Id. 514; id. 658.) 

June I. — Votes against a motion to lay on the table the whole subject of 
the charges against B. F. Curry and Samuel Gwinn, and their responses. 
(G. 24 C. I s. 1836-1836, III. 519; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1668.) 

June 2. — Report on a bill to provide for the execution of the laws of 
the United States in Michigan. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 521.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill to prohibit the circulation through 
the mails of incendiary publications, and to provide for the disposition of 
those sent to persons in States where they are prohibited by law. The amend- 
ment was rejected. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading, 
which was ordered. (Id. 522; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1675.) 

June 4. — Votes against a motion to recommit the bill to extend the 
charter of certain banks in the District of Columbia. Votes on various mo- 
tions to strike out portions of the bill. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill 
for a third reading. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 531: Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835- 
1836, XII., pt. 2, 1695, 1696.) 

June 6. — Votes against postponing indefinitely a bill to extend the time 
for receiving proof of pre-emption claims under the act of 1834. Votes in 
favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading. (G. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 
532; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1697.) 

June 7. — Introduces a resolution for inquiring into the expediency of 
establishing a post route from Danville to Cattawissa, Pennsylvania. (G. 24 
C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 535.) 

Votes against a motion to strike out the first section of the bill to extend 
the time for proving pre-emption claims suspended by the contingent location 
of certain alleged Choctaw reservations. Remarks on the bill. (Id. 535; 
Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1698.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill to extend the charters of certain 
banks in the District of Columbia. (Id. 535; id. 1720.) 

* June 8. — Remarks on the bill to prohibit deputy postmasters from 
receiving and transmitting certain papers described therein, in the States in 
which they should be prohibited by law. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 539, 
Appendix, 454-455- 456-457, 458; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1722- 
1726, 1732-1735, 1736.) 

Votes in favor of the bill. (Id. 539, Appendix, 458; id. 737.) 

June 9. — Votes against an amendment to the bill supplementary to the 



Reg.=Register of Debates.— G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session. 
*=Printeci herein. 



xlviii THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

act establishing the northern boundary of Ohio and for the admission of 
Michigan, exempting from taxation for five years lands in Michigan sold 
by the United States. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 540.) 

Votes in favor of the bill to extend the time for receiving proof of pre- 
emption claims under the act of 1834. (Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 
1742.) 

June 10. — Remarks on the bill to increase the military peace establishment. 
Votes in favor of certain instructions to the committee to which the bill was 
recommitted. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 543, 544; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835- 
1836, XII., pt. 2, 1756, 1757.) 

June 13. — Votes on various amendments to the bill to regulate the deposits 
of public money. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 548; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, 
XII., pt. 2, 1766; G. 26 C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII., Appendix, 120.) 

June 14. — Submits a resolution to inquire into the expediency of providing 
for the compensation of Senators and Representatives from Michigan. (G. 
24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 551.) 

* Remarks on a bill to change the organization of the Post Office Depart- 
ment. (Id. 552; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1770.) 

* Remarks on an amendment to the bill to regulate the deposits of public 
money, providing that outstanding appropriations shall be deducted prior to 
a distribution of the surplus to the States. (Id. 553; id. 1777-1778.) Votes 
in favor of recommitting the bill, with instructions to bring in two bills, one 
to regulate the deposits of public money, and the other for the distribution 
of the surplus to the States. (Id. 553; id. 1778.) 

June 15. — Votes against a motion to reconsider the vote to recommit the 
bill regulating the deposits of public money, with certain instructions. (G. 24 
C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 556; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1780.) 

June 16. — Submits motions as to amendments made by the House to 
the bills relating to Ohio, Michigan, and Arkansas. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, 
III. 558; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1781.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to recommit the bill to regulate the deposits 
of public money, with instructions. (Id. 559; id. 1782.) 

Votes on various amendments to the bill for the distribution of the 
surplus. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading, which was 
ordered. (Id. 559, 560; id. 1785, 1786, 1787.) 

June 17. — Introduces a resolution to extend to his widow the pension 
granted to Simon Kenton. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 362.) 

* Remarks on the passage of the bill to regulate the deposits of public 
money. (Id. 562, Appendix, 532-533; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 
1800-1805.) Votes in favor of the passage of the bill. (Id. 562; id. 1845.) 

June 18. — Presents a memorial in favor of the box system in the Post 
Office. (G. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 564.) 

* June 20. — Remarks on Davis's amendment and his own amendment to 
the bill for the reorganization of the Post Office, concerning the box system. 
Moves an amendment as to returns to be made for box rentals. Votes against 
Davis's amendment. Votes in favor of his own amendment. (G. 24 C. i s. 
1835-1836, III. 567; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XIL, pt. 2, 1850, 1851.) 

Votes against a motion to strike out the first section of the bill to increase 
the military peace establishment. Votes in favor of a motion to strike out 
sections giving the franking privilege to the War Department, authorizing the 
equipment of one regiment of infantry as a regiment of riflemen, and directing 
certain officers to perform the duties of superior officers who may be absent. 
(Id. 568; id. 1853.) 



Reg.=Register of Debates.— G.=CongressionaI Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session. 
*- Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1836 xlix 

Moves to refer a bill concerning the judicial system of Arkansas to the 
Committee on the Judiciary. (Id. 568.) 

* Jtme 21. — Remarks on a bill for organizing the Navy of the United 
States. Votes in favor of laying the bill on the table. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835- 
1836, III. 571 ; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XIL, pt. 2, 1856-1857.) 

June 22. — Remarks on the House amendment to the bill to regulate the 
deposits of public money. (Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XIL, pt. 2, 575; G. 24 
C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 575-) 

June 23. — Votes in favor of taking up the bill to change the mode of 
conducting the sales of public lands. Votes in favor of a motion to post- 
pone the bill indefinitely. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 578, 579; Reg. 24 C. 
I s. 1835-1836, XIL, pt. 2, 1867, 1870.) 

"^ June 24. — Remarks on an amendment to the bill for the reorganization 
of the Army, increasing the number of lieutenants to 350. Moves an amend- 
ment, which was rejected, fixing the number at 300. Votes in favor of a 
motion to lay the bill on the table. Moves a further amendment fixing the 
number of captains at 40 instead of 50, and the number of midshipmen at 60 
instead of 75; the amendment was agreed to. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 
584; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XIL, pt. 2, 1874-1875-) 

June 25. — Votes against a motion to lay on the table a bill to grant 
certain lands to Indiana. Illinois, Alabama, and Mississippi. (G. 24 C. i s. 
1835-1836, HI. 585; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XIL, pt. 2, 1876.) 

Remarks on the bill, returned from the House with amendments, to pro- 
vide for the execution of the United States laws in Michigan. (Id. 585.) 

* Moves to take up the bill to regulate and increase the pay of officers of 
the Marine Corps. Moves an amendment, which was lost, assimilating the 
pay of marine officers to that of officers of infantry of like grades, while 
serving on shore, and to that of navy officers, when serving at sea. Remarks 
on the amendment. Renews the amendment when the bill is reported to the 
Senate, and it is agreed to. (Id. 585: id. 1877.) 

June 27. — Votes in favor of the bill, which was vetoed by the President, 
fixing a day for the annual meeting of Congress. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, 
III. 588; Reg. 24 C I s. 1835-1836, XIL, pt. 2, 1880.) 

Votes against taking up the bill to anticipate the payment of indemnities 
due to claimants under the French and Neapolitan treaties. (Id. 588; id. 
1882.) 

Votes against a motion to postpone indefinitely the bill to establish 
armories, arsenals, etc., in certain places. Remarks on the bill. (Id. 589; 
id. 1884.) 

June 28. — Votes against a resolution for rescinding the resolution of the 
Senate of March 24, 1834, censuring the President. (G. 24 C i s. 1835-1836, 
III. 591; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XIL, pt. 2, 1897.) 

Votes against recommitting, with certain instructions, the bill providing 
for the accommodation of the Patent Office. Votes in favor of the bill. 
(Id. 591; id. 1898.) 

June 29. — Votes against a motion to recommit the Fortifications Bill for 
1836, with instructions to reduce the appropriations to not more than 
$1,600,000. Votes against a motion to lay the bill on the table. Votes against 
a motion to recommit the bill without instructions. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, 
III. 595; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XIL, pt. 2, 1906, 1907.) 

June 30. — Votes in favor of the passage of the bill to establish armories, 
arsenals, etc. (G. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, III. 599: Reg. 24 C i s. 1835-1836, 
XIL, pt. 2, 1909.) 



Reg.=Register of Debates. — G.=Congressional Globe. — C.=Congress. — s.=session. 
*=Printed herein. 

iv 



I THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

Votes against a motion to strike from the Fortifications Bill an appropri- 
ation of $150,000 for Fort Delaware. Votes against a motion to recommit the 
bill, with instructions to reduce the appropriations. Votes in favor of 
engrossing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 599; id. 1910, 191 1.) 

Appointed a member of the committee to consider and report in what 
manner to express the feelings of the nation on the decease of James Madison. 
(Id. 599; id. 1913.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill supplemental to the act to regulate 
the public deposits. (Id. 599; id. 1913.) 

Moves to take up the bill for the relief of James Bradford, of Louisiana. 
(Id. 600.) 

^ July I. — Remarks on a resolution favoring the acknowledgment of 
Texan independence. Votes in favor of the resolution as amended. (G. 24 
C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 604; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1916, 1928.) 

Remarks on a bill making additional appropriations for the Delaware 
breakwater and for the improvement of certain harbors. (Id. 604; id. 1928.) 

July 2. — Votes in favor of a motion to take up the Pension Bill. Suggests 
an amendment, which was agreed to, providing for widows of Revolutionary- 
officers and soldiers, who were married during the war and who remained 
widows. (G. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 608; Reg. 24 C. i s. 1835-1836, XII., 
pt. 2, 1929.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill providing for the Delaware 
breakwater and for the improvement of certain harbors. (Id. 608; id. 1930.) 

Votes on various amendments to the Harbor Bill. Votes against a 
motion to postpone consideration of the bill. Remarks on the bill. Votes in 
favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 609; id. 1935.) 

July 4. — Moves that the Senate adjourn sine die. Motion carried. (G. 
24 C. I s. 1835-1836, III. 615; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1835-1836, XII., pt. 2, 1940.) 

December 5. — Appears as a Senator from Pennsjdvania. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 
1836-1837, IV. I ; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. i, i.) 

December 12. — Elected chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations, 
receiving 21 votes, against 14 for Clay, i for King, of Alabama, and i for 
King, of Georgia. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 17; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, 
XIII., pt. I, 6, 7-) 

December 14. — Presents a petition of the umbrella manufacturers of 
Philadelphia with regard to the construction of tariff laws affecting their 
imports; also a petition of John Laub, for compensation as acting Comptroller 
of the Treasury. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 22.) 

Elected a member of the Committee on the District of Columbia. (Reg. 
24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 7.) 

December 15. — Moves reference of the petition of Charles Frazier to the 
Committee on Claims, which was agreed to. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 26.) 

December 19. — The Chair communicates the credentials of James 
Buchanan, re-elected, by the Pennsylvania Legislature, a Senator from that 
State for six years, from March 4, 1837. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 29.) 

Presents a petition for a custom-house at Philadelphia; also a petition 
for a Federal court-house at Philadelphia. (Id. 29.) 

Moves that so much of the President's message as relates to foreign 
relations be referred to the Committee. It was so ordered. (Id. 30.) 

* December 21. — Remarks on a motion to refer to the Committee on 
Finance a bill relating to deposits of public money. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, 
IV. 40, Appendix, 319-320; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. i, 85-86.) 

Votes in favor of the motion to refer the bill to that Committee. (Id. 41 ; 
id. 90.) 



Res-=Register of Debates.— G.=Congressional Globe. — C.=Congress.— s.=session. 
*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1837 li 

December 22. — Makes a motion, and remarks thereon, to refer to the 
Committee on Foreign Relations the message of the President relative to the 
recognition of the independence of Texas and its admission into the Union. 
The motion was adopted. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 43; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 
1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 104.) 

Reports a bill for the relief of the executrix of Richard W. Meade. 
(Id. 43.) 

December 26. — Presents a petition for a custom-house at Philadelphia; 
also a memorial for the reduction of postage. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, 

IV. 49.) 

Introduces a bill authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury to compromise 
the claim of the United States in the Alleghany Bank of Pennsylvania. 
(Id. 51.) 

Gives notice of a request, on the next day, for leave to bring in a bill for 
the relief of insolvent debtors. (Id. 51.) 

December 27. — Introduces a bill to extend the several acts in force for 
the relief of insolvent debtors. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 53.) 

* December 29. — Remarks on the bill for the admission of Michigan into 
the Union. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 60, 60-61 ; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, 
XIII., pt. I, 169-170, 171-172.) 

SENATE (Continued), 1837. 

January 2, 1837. — Presents the petition of Dr. Plantou for an appropria- 
tion to test his several inventions for navigation of canals by steamboats and 
for construction of railroads ; also a petition for a custom-house at Philadel- 
phia. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 66.) 

* January 3. — Speech on the bill for the admission of Michigan into the 
Union. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 68, Appendix, 73-76, 84; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 
1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 235-246.) 

Votes against a number of motions that the Senate adjourn. (Id. 68; 
id. 267.) 

January 4. — Votes on various motions on and amendments to the bill 
for the admission of Michigan. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a 
third reading, which was ordered. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 71; Reg. 
24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 293, 294, 295.) 

* January 5. — Remarks on the bill for the admission of Michigan into the 
Union. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. y^, Appendix, 147-149; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 
1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 310-317-) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill. (Id. JS', id. 325.) 

January 6. — Presents a petition for the erection of a federal court-house 
in Philadelphia. Remarks on the subject. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 75; 
Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIIL,_pt. I, 325-326.) 

January 9. — Presents a petition for an appropriation for Alleghany River 
improvement ; also a petition of the Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce for 
extension of time for the production of certificates on articles entitled to 
drawback. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1 836-1 837, IV. 78.) 

January 10. — Presents a memorial of claimants under the French treaty; 
also the petition of Moore & Co. for compensation for additional services 
rendered as mail contractors ; also a memorial protesting against the reduction 
of the duty on coal. Remarks on the last memorial. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, 
IV. 81.; 

January 11. — Makes a report on the memorial of Thomas Vowell. (G. 
24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 83.) 



Re?.=Register of Debates. — G.= Congressional Globe. — C.=Congress. — s.=session. 
*=Printe(i herein. 



lii THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

Votes in favor of referring to the Committee on Public Lands a resolu- 
tion to rescind the Treasury order of July, 1836, designating funds which 
shall be received in payment of public lands. (Id. 83; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836- 
1837, XIII., pt. I, 376.) 

January 12. — Remarks on a bill to limit the sales of public lands. (G. 24 
C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 91-92; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 378, 379-) 

January 13. — Presents a petition remonstrating against the reduction of 
the duty on coal. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 94.) 

Votes against a motion made, during discussion of the Expunging Resolu- 
tion, for adjournment. (Id. 94.) 

January 16. — Presents a petition from Samuel Raub, Jr., concerning his 
improvement in the construction of steam-boilers ; also a memorial from 
hardware dealers in Philadelphia, asking the repeal of certain tariff provi- 
sions ; also a memorial concerning the duty on coal. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, 
IV. 98.) 

* Speech on Benton's resolution to expunge from the Senate journal the 
resolution of March 28, 1834, censuring President Jackson for having 
removed deposits from the Bank of the United States. (Id. 98, Appendix, 
106-111; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 440-458.) 

Votes against a motion to adjourn, which was lost. (Id. 98.) 

Votes in favor of the Expunging Resolution, which was adopted. (Id. 
99; id. 504.) 

Votes against a motion to place before the bar of the Senate a person 
apprehended in the gallery for raising a disturbance while the Clerk expunged 
the resolution. The motion was carried. Votes in favor of a motion to 
discharge the person, which was agreed to. (Id. 99, 100; id. 506.) 

January 17. — Presents a petition. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 102.) 

Votes in favor of printing the usual number of a presentment of the 
grand jury of Washington County, D. C, with reference to outside inter- 
ference in local affairs, especially slavery. (Id. 102.) 

Moves to postpone till the next day the consideration of the bill to limit 
the sales of public lands. Motion adopted. (Id. 102.) 

January 18. — Reports a bill to continue in force, for a limited time, the 
act for carrying into effect the convention between the United States and 
Spain. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 105.) 

* Remarks on the bill to anticipate the payment of indemnities stipulated 
in the treaties with France and the Two Sicilies. (Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, 
XIII., pt. I, 521-522, 523; G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 106.) Votes in favor 
of ordering the bill to be engrossed for a third reading. (Id. 524; id. 106.) 

January 19. — Presents the petition of Horatio N. Crabb for certain 
allowances of pay. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. no.) 

January 20. — Votes against a motion to take up the bill designating and 
limiting the funds receivable for the United States revenues. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 

1836-1837, IV. III.) 

Votes aye on the passage of a bill to authorize the relinquishment of 
certain public lands for the use of schools and the entry of other lands in lieu 
thereof. (Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. i, 529.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill to limit the sales of public lands, 
prescribing the prices at which the sales shall be made. Amendment rejected. 

(Id. 529.) 

January 21. — Votes for an amendment to the bill to limit the sales of 
public lands, making the term of residence required of a settler, before he 



Reg.=Register of Debates. — G.=Congressioiial Globe.— C.=Congress. — s.=session. 
*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1837 liii 

can obtain a patent, two years instead of three. Amendment adopted. (G. 24 
C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 115.) 

January 24. — Presents a petition for constructing a harbor at the mouth 
of Walnut Creek, which empties into Lake Erie. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, 
IV. 121.) 

Remarks on a resohition to inquire into the construction of the act of 
June 30, 1834, regulating the pay of the Marine Corps, by the Fourth Auditor. 
(Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, Xlil., pt. I, 535.) 

January 25. — Introduces a bill to explain and amend the 5th section of 
the act of June 30, 1834, for the better organization of the United States 
Marine Corps. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 123.) 

Participates in the debate on the bill for the relief of the executrix of 
Richard W. Meade. (Reg.- 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. i, 557-) 

* January 26. — Submits an amendment to the bill to limit the sales of 
public lands, providing for the entry of sections in the name of certain minor 
children. Remarks on the subject. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 126; Reg. 
24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 559-560, 560-561, 561-562.) 

Votes in favor of taking up the bill to limit and designate the funds 
receivable for the public revenue. Votes in favor of an amendment that 
notes of banks shall not be received for public dues, where such banks issue 
notes of a denomination less than twenty dollars. (Id. 127; id. 563.) 

* January 27. — Remarks on a memorial for the incorporation of an asso- 
ciation for colonizing free negroes on the coast of Africa. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 
1836-1837, IV. 130, 130-131 ; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 566, 567, 
568.) 

January 28. — Presents a memorial praying that New Castle on the Dela- 
ware, may be made a port of entry. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 135.) 

Receives one vote on the ballot for a President />ro tern, of the Senate, 
on the retirement of Vice-President Martin Van Buren. (Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 
1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 618.) 

January 30. — Votes against a motion to take up the memorial of the 
American Colonization Society, asking for a charter. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836- 
1837, IV. 138; Reg. 24 C. I s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 636.) 

Remarks on the consideration of the resolution of thanks to Martin Van 
Buren, the retiring Vice-President. (Id. 635.) 

Submits an amendment to the bill to limit the sales of public lands. 
Amendment agreed to. (Id. 138; id. 645.) 

February i. — Votes in favor of an amendment to the above bill, making 
it retrospective in its character in regard to pre-emption settlement. (G. 24 
C. 2 s. 1836-1837. IV. 145; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 667.) 

February 2. — Presents a petition protesting against the repeal of the 
duties on coal; remarks on the subject. Presents the memorial of F. 
Raviesces, of Alabama, complaining against two land officers. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 

1836-1837, IV. 147.) 

Appointed a member of a select committee to whom was referred the 
petition of T. Moore and other British authors for copyright privileges in 
the United States. (Id. 147; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. i, 671; 
S. Doc. 134, 24 C. 2 s.) 

* Remarks on the memorial. (Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. i, 671.) 
February 3. — Votes on various motions and amendments to the bill to 

limit the sales of public lands. Remarks on the bill. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836- 
1837, IV. 150; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 693, 694, 695, 696.) 

Introduces a resolution to inquire into the expediency of erecting a 



Reg.=Register of Debates.— G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session. 
*=Printed herein. 



liv THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

light-house on Sand Island, opposite Mobile Point, and of placing buoys and 
beacons in Mobile Bay. (Id. 150.) 

February 4. — Votes in favor of a resolution as to the mode of examining 
and counting the votes for President and Vice-President. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 
1836-1837, IV. 152; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 701.) 

Remarks on taking up the bill to limit the sales of public lands. (Reg. 
24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 701.) Calls for the yeas and nays on a 
motion to recommit the bill ; votes against the motion, which was carried. 
(G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 153; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIIL, pt. i, 706.) 

Remarks on a petition of inhabitants of Pottsville, Pa., protesting against 
the repeal of the duty on coal. (Niles' Weekly Register, Feb. 4, 1837, LI. 
360.) 

* February 6. — Remarks on the reception of memorials presented by him 
for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836- 
1837, IV. 158; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIIL, pt. I, 709.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to lay on the table the question of the 
reception of these memorials. The motion prevailed. (Id. 159; id. 711.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to lay on the table several memorials from 
abolitionists of Ohio and Massachusetts. The motion prevailed. (Id. 160; 
id. 723.) 

February 7. — Moves that the President's message on relations with 
Mexico be printed, and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. So 
ordered. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 163; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIIL, 
pt. I, 724.) 

Presents the petition of Hannah Mendenhall Baldwin, praying for a 
pension. (Id. 163.) 

Votes in favor of laying on the table the question of the reception of 
certain petitions from Ohio for the abolition of slavery in the District of 
Columbia. Motion adopted. (Id. 163; id. 724.) 

Presents the petition of Reuben James. (Id. 163.) 

Votes on various amendments to the bill to limit the sales of public lands. 
(G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 164; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIIL, pt. i, 
727, 728, 729.) 

* Remarks on a substitute for the bill, offered by Calhoun. (Id. 164; 

id. 73I-) 

Votes against Calhoun's substitute. Votes in favor of engrossing the 
bill for a third reading. (Id. 164; id. 736.) 

February 8. — Votes for Richard M. Johnson for Vice-President. (G. 24 
C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 166; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIIL, pt. i, 738.) 

February 9. — Votes in favor of a motion to lay on the table the question 
of the reception of a petition from Vermont, praying for the abolition of 
slavery in the District of Columbia. Motion prevailed. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836- 
1837. IV. 167; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. i836-i837,_XIII., pt. i, 739-) 

Votes in favor of a motion to reconsider the vote ordering to a second 
reading the bill to cede to the new States the public lands which lie in them, 
on certain conditions. Motion prevailed. (Id. 167; id. 7S3-) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill to limit the sales of public lands. 
(Id. 167; id. 777-) 

February 10. — Reports the House bill concerning discriminating duties on 
Dutch and Belgian vessels, with amendment. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 

170.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill to designate and limit the 



Reg.=Register of Debates.— G.= Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session. 
*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1837 Iv 

funds receivable for public revenue. The bill was passed. (Id. 170; Reg. 24 
C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 778.) 

Votes against a motion to lay on the table the Fortifications Appropria- 
tion Bill. Motion lost. (Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIIL, pt. i, 779-) 

* February 11. — Remarks on the bill to cede public lands to the new 
States in which they lie, on certain conditions. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, 
IV. 172, Appendix, 159-160; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIIL, pt. i, 792-794.) 
Votes in favor of his motion, which was carried, to lay the bill on the table. 
(Id. 172; id. 794.) 

Votes aye on the passage of the bill making provision for the collection of 
materials and the purchase of sites for certain fortifications. (Id. 172; id. 

79S-) 

February 13. — Presents the petition of McNair of Pittsburg, mail con- 
tractor, for compensation for extra services. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 175.) 

Moves that 2,000 extra copies of the President's message on relations 
with Mexico be printed. Motion carried. (Id. 175.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to strike out the 4th section of the bill 
supplementary to the act for the improvement of the useful arts, which 
provides for the restoration of models destroyed by the burning of the 
Post Office. (Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837. XIIL, pt. i, 797-) 

Votes against a motion to consider the resolution relative to acknowl- 
edging the independence of Texas. (Id. 175; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, 
XIIL, pt. I, 797.) 

Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading the bill to establish an 
armory, arsenals, and depots in certain localities. So ordered. (Id. 176; id. 

800.) 

Moves consideration of the House bill respecting the duties on Belgian 
and Dutch vessels and their cargoes. Motion carried. (Id. 176; id. 800-801.) 

* Remarks on the bill. (Id. 176; id. 801.) 

* Remarks on the bill to amend the act for the punishment of certain 
crimes against the United States. Votes in favor of an amendment substi- 
tuting confinement at hard labor for a term instead of the death penalty 
for the crime of burning public buildings. Amendment lost. Moves an 
amendment by substituting imprisonment in the penitentiary for the punish- 
ment of death in case of accessaries before the fact. Amendment rejected. 
Votes against ordering the bill to be engrossed for a third reading, which 
was ordered. (Id. 176; id. 801-802.) 

February 15.— Votes against the passage of the bill to amend the act of 
1790 for the punishment of certain crimes against the United States. (G. 24 
C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 184; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIIL, pt. I, 805.) 

* Remarks on the bill respecting the discriminating duties on Dutch and 
Belgian vessels and their cargoes. (Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIIL, pt. i, 
805-806.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill for the continuation of the 
Cumberland Road, by inserting a disclaimer of the faith of the Government 
being pledged to further appropriations. Votes in favor of engrossing the 
bill for a third reading, which was ordered. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 
184; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIIL, pt. I, 807.) 

February 16.— Report of the select committee on the petitions of British 
and American authors regarding the extension of copyright to foreigners. 
(S. Doc. 179, 24 C. 2 s.; G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 188.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill for increasing the military estab- 



Reg.=Register of Debates.— G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session. 
*=Printed herein. 



Ivi THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

lishment of the United States. (G. 24 C 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 188; Reg. 24 C. 
2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 840.) 

February 17. — Votes in favor of an amendment to the bill to settle the 
claims of the executrix of Richard W. Meade. Votes in favor of the 
passage of the bill, which was passed. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837; Reg. 24 C. 
2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 846.) 

* February 18. — Report on President Jackson's message of Feb. 6, 1837, 
recommending that the Senate concur in the President's opinion that another 
demand ought to be made upon Mexico for redress of the United States' 
grievances. (S. Doc. 189, 24 C. 2 s. ; G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 193-194; 
Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 854-857.) 

February 20. — Votes in favor of a resolution for the purchase of the 
manuscripts of James Madison. Resolution adopted. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836- 
1837, IV. 195; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 872.) 

February 21. — Gives notice that he would, on the following Thursday, 
call for the consideration of the report on relations with Mexico. (G. 24 C. 
2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 195.) 

Votes aye on the passage of a bill to complete a certain military road in 
Arkansas. (Id. 195.) 

* Remarks on instructions from the Pennsylvania Legislature to oppose 
tariff reduction. (Id. 195; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. i, 873.) Votes 
against a motion to take up the bill reducing the duties on certain imported 
articles. (Id. 195; id. 874.) Votes in favor of a motion to strike out from 
the bill twelve articles of drugs. Motion prevailed. Speaks and votes in 
favor of an amendment to strike out the articles of china and porcelain, 
earthen, and stone ware. (Id. 195; id. 874, 880, 884.) 

* February 24. — Votes and makes remarks on various motions and 
amendments to the above bill. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 201, Appendix, 
202, 239-241; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 939, 948-953, 961-962, 
965, 966; pt. 2, 2200.) 

Votes against engrossing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 201, 202; 
id. 966.) 

February 27. — Presents petitions from Pennsylvania for the abolition 
of slavery in the District of Columbia. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 209.) 

* Moves to take up the report on relations with Mexico, and the 
resolution accompanying it. Remarks on the subject. Votes in favor of ihe 
resolution, which was adopted unanimously. (Id. 209, 210; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 
1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 985.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to postpone the consideration of the resolu- 
tion for the recognition of Texan independence. (Id. 210; id. 986.) 

Moves to table the bill to renumerate Captain Francis Allyn for con- 
veying General Lafayette to the United States in 1824. Motion prevailed. 
(Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. I, 988.) 

Moves an amendment to the bill for the relief of Colonel Matthew 
Arbuckle, requiring him to pay $1.25 per acre to the United States for the 
lands in question. Amendment agreed to. (Id. 991.) 

* February 28. — Remarks on a motion to strike from the Fortifications 
Bill the section providing for the distribution among the States of any 
surplus which may remain in the Treasury on January i, 1838. (G. 24 C. 2 s 
1836-1837, IV. 212, Appendix, 271-273; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIII., pt. i, 
993-996, 1003-1007.) Votes in favor of the motion, which prevailed. (Id. 
212.) 

Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading the bill anticipating the 



Reg.=ReKister of Debates.— G.=Congressional Globej;— C.=Congress.— s.=session. 
*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1837 Ivii 

payment of the indemnities to United States citizens under the convention 
with France of July 4, 1831, and that with the Two Sicilies of October 14, 
1832. (Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIIL, pt. I, 1009.) 

♦ March i. — Remarks on the resohition for the recognition of Texan 
independence. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 214; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, 
XIIL, pt. I. 1012-1013.) Moves to lay the resolution on the table, which 
motion was negatived. Votes in favor of a proposed substitute, declaring 
that when satisfactory information should be received of the successful 
operation of a government, " it will be expedient " to acknowledge Texan 
independence. Substitute rejected. Votes against the original resolution, 
which was adopted. (Id. 214; id. 1013.) 

Remarks on an amendment to the bill making appropriations for certain 
harbors and rivers, which provided for the relief of Alexandria. Votes for 
the amendment, which was agreed to. (Id. 214; id. 1014.) 

Votes in favor of an amendment to the General Appropriation Bill, 
appropriating $30,000 for the manuscripts of James Madison. Amendment 
agreed to. (Id. 214: id. 1015.) 

Moves an amendment appropriating $8,000 for statuary for the Capitol, 
without naming an artist. Amendment agreed to. (Id. 214; id. 1015.) 

Votes against an amendment, which was rejected, to strike out of the 
appropriation for the contingent appointment of a diplomatic agent to Texas 
the provision for satisfactory evidence that Texas is independent. (Reg. 24 
C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIIL, pt. I, 1016.) 

March 2. — Votes in favor of the bill making appropriations for certain 
harbors and rivers. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 216; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836- 
1837, XIIL, pt. I, 1018.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to strike from the bill for the repair and 
construction of certain roads, including the Cumberland Road, the section 
which provided for repayment of the appropriation for the road out of the 
two per cent. fund. (Id. 216; id. 1019.) 

Votes against a motion to lay on the table the motion to reconsider the 
vote by which the resolution relative to recognizing Texan independence 
was adopted. Votes in favor of a motion to reconsider. Motion lost. (Id. 
216; id. 1019.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to insist on the amendment of the Senate in 
striking out the section of the Fortifications Bill providing for the distribution 
of the surplus revenue among the States. (Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIIL. 
pt. I, 1020.) 

Remarks on a bill to aid the Falmouth and Alexandria Railroad Company 
to construct their road within the District of Columbia. Votes against 
engrossing the bill for a third reading, which was ordered. (Id. 1021 ; 
G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, IV. 216.) 

March 3. — Votes against a resolution authorizing the purchase of certain 
books for the several committee-rooms of the Senate. (G. 24 C. 2 s. 1836- 
1837. IV. 219.) 

Votes in favor of adhering to the Senate disagreement with the House 
in striking out the section of the Fortifications Bill providing for the distribu- 
tion of surplus revenue. (Id. 219; Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIIL, pt. i, 
1034O 

Remarks on the question of printing a memorial from the Cherokee 
Indians. (Id. 219; id. 1035.) 

Votes in favor of agreeing to a report from the Judiciary Committee 
that Ambrose H. Sevier is entitled to a seat as a Senator from Arkansas. 
(Reg. 24 C. 2 s. 1836-1837, XIIL, pt. I, 1036.) 



Reg:.=Register of Debates. — G.= Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session. 
*=Printed herein. 



Iviii THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

September 4. — Moves that the Senate adjourn, which was agreed to. 
(G. 25 C. I s. 1837, V. I.) 

September 5. — Remarks on the number of copies to be printed of the 
President's message. (G. 25 C. i s. 1837, V. 10.) 

September 7. — Presents a memorial for the construction of a turnpike 
road from the Cumberland Road to Lake Erie. Remarks on the memorial. 
Also presents a petition from Alleghany College for a grant of land. (G. 25 
C. I s. 1837, V. 14.) 

September 11. — Remarks on the course of Senate business with reference 
to the presentation of petitions. (G. 25 C. i s. 1837, V. 18.) 

September 12. — Presents a memorial against the annexation of Texas. 
(G. 25 C. I s. 1837, V. 21.) 

Remarks on considering a resolution concerning the jurisdiction of the 
U. S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. (Id. 21.) 

Moves the consideration of executive business, which was agreed to. 
(Id. 21.) 

September 14. — Presents remonstrances against the annexation of Texas. 
(G. 25 C. I s. 1837, V. 26.) 

* Remarks on the bill to postpone the payment of the fourth instalment 
of the deposits with the States. (Id. 30, Appendix, 13-14.) 

Moves an amendment to the bill that the first three instalments shall 
remain on deposit with the States until otherwise directed by Congress. The 
amendment was adopted. Votes against a proposed substitute. Votes in 
favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 30.) 

September 15. — Votes in favor of the passage of the bill to postpone the 
payment of the fourth instalment of the deposits with the States. (G. 25 C. 
I s. 1837, V. 32.) 

September 16. — Votes against a motion to postpone the bill authorizing 
the Secretary of the Treasury to issue Treasury notes. (G. 25 C. i s. 1837, 

V. 36.) 

September 18. — Votes in favor of engrossing the above bill for a third 
reading. (G. 25 C. i s. 1837, V. 38.) 

Remarks on a bill authorizing the deposit of merchandise in the public 
stores. (Niles' Register, Sept. 23, 1837, LIII. 59; G. 25 C. i s. 1837, V. 38.) 

September 2S. — Presents a memorial against the annexation of Texas. 
(G. 25 C. I s. 1837, V. 67.) 

Votes against a motion to postpone the bill imposing certain duties on 
public officers as depositories in certain cases. (Id. 68.) 

September 26. — Moves that the Committee on Foreign Relations be dis- 
charged from consideration of a memorial from certain insurance officers 
for indemnity for a vessel destroyed in 1800. Remarks. The motion was 
agreed to. (G. 25 C. i s. 1837, V. 72-) 

Votes against a motion to postpone the resolution reported by the 
Committee on Finance in favor of granting the petition for a national bank. 
(Id. 72).) Votes on various amendments. (Id. 74, 75, 76.) Votes in favor 
of the resolution as reported. (Id. 76.) 

September 27. — Remarks on a suggested adjournment, during considera- 
tion of the bill imposing certain duties on public officers as depositories. 
(G. 25 C. I s. 1837, V. 80.) 

September 28 — Gives notice of an intention to address the Senate on the 
bill imposing certain duties on public officers as depositories, but moves an 
adjournment, which was agreed to. (G. 25 C. I s. 1837, V. 83.) 

* September 29.— Speech on the above bill. (G. 25 C. i s. 1837, V. 85, 
Appendix, 94-103.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1837 lix 

September 30. — Presents memorials against the annexation of Texas. 
<G. 25 C. IS. 1837, V. 91.) 

Votes in favor of concurring in the House amendment to the bill to 
postpone the fourth instalment of deposits with the States. (Id. 92.) 

October 2. — Moves to postpone consideration of the bill to regulate the 
fees of United States district attorneys in certain cases, which was agreed to. 
(G. 25 C. I s. 1837, V. 94-) 

Remarks on a resolution as to the day of adjournment. (Id. 94.) 

* October 3. — Remarks on the bill imposing certain duties on public 
officers as depositories. Votes on various amendments to the bill. Votes 
in favor of engrossing it for a third reading, which was ordered. (G. 25 C. 
I s. 1837, V. 96.) 

* October 4. — Remarks on the bill regulating the fees of United States 
district attorneys in the renewal of merchants' bonds. (G. 25 C. i s. 1837, 
V. 100.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill imposing additional duties on 
public officers as depositories in certain cases. (Id. 100, Appendix, iii.) 

* October 9. — Adoption of his amendment to the bill regulating the fees 
of district attorneys in the renewal of merchants' bonds, allowing $4 for all 
bonds exceeding $500 and $2 for all bonds of and under that sum. (G. 25 
C. I s. 1837, V. 115.) 

Remarks on Clay's amendment to the bill, placing the cases of extension 
of bonds given for duties on imports under the direction of the Secretary 
of the Treasury, the charges to be the same as those receivable on taking an 
original bond. Votes against the amendment, which was agreed to. Speaks 
on the bill, and moves recommitment with instructions to provide reasonable 
compensation to district attorneys for services already rendered in extending 
bonds. Motion lost. (Id. 116.) 

Moves amendment to the bill authorizing merchandise to be deposited 
in the public stores, with reference to imported railroad iron. Amendment 
agreed to. (Id. 116.) 

October 10. — Presents memorials against the annexation of Texas. (G. 
25 C. I s. 1837, V. 120.) 

Votes against a motion to postpone the bill authorizing the deposit of 
merchandise in warehouses. Motion lost. Votes against a proposal making 
it optional, until July i, 1842, for an importer in certain cases to place 
dutiable goods in store or to give bonds for the duties. (Id. 121.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill to authorize the issue of 
Treasury notes, making $100 the minimum. Votes in favor of the passage 
of the bill. (Id. 121.) 

Moves that the Senate proceed with executive business, which was 
agreed to. (Id. 121.) 

* October 11. — Remarks on the bill authorizing the deposit of mer- 
chandise in public warehouses. (G. 25 C. i s. 1837, V. 123, 124.) Votes 
against a motion to postpone the bill. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill 
for a third reading. (Id. 124.) 

Remarks on the bill revoking the charters of certain banks in the 
District of Columbia, and for the suppression of small notes therein. (Id. 
125.) 

October 14. — Presents petitions against the admission into the Union of 
any new State that permits slavery; also memorials against the admission 
of Texas. (G. 25 C. i s. 1837, V. 138.) 

Remarks on the question of reading for a second and third time and 
passing the House bill for the suppression of Indian hostilities in Florida. 
(Id. 139.) 



G.=Congressional Globe. — C.=Coiigress.— s,=session.— *=Printed herein. 



Ix THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

Remarks on the House amendments to the bill for adjusting the claims 
of the Government on the late deposit banks, extending the time for the 
first, second, and third payments. (Id. 139, 140.) 

December 4. — Appears as a Senator from Pennsylvania. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 
1837-1838, VI. I.) 

December 6. — Remarks on a motion that the Chair appoint the standing 
committees. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 9.) 

Gives notice that he will, on the next day, introduce a bill to explain and 
amend the 5th section of the act of June 30, 1834, for the better organization 
of the United States Marine Corps. (Id. 9.) 

December 7. — On the announcement of the standing committees, appears 
as Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations and as a member of the 
Committee on Manufactures. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 15; S. Doc. 4, 25 
C. 2 s.) 

Presents the petition of the Union Bank of Georgetown for an extension 
of charter to wind up its affairs ; also a memorial from Richard W. Harrison 
for remuneration for moneys expended for the United States. (Id. 15.) 

Introduces a bill amending the act of June 30, 1834, for the better 
organization of the Marine Corps. (Id. 15.) 

* December 14. — Remarks on a resolution to rescind the Expunging Reso- 
lution. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 27.) 

December i8.-^Presents a number of resolutions relating to the paper 
currency, to a new custom-house at Philadelphia, to the annexation of 
Texas, to a grant of land to the Alleghany College, and to the Erie Road. 
(G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 33.) 

* Remarks on petitions for the abolition of slavery in the District of 
Columbia. (Id. 38-39.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to lay the petitions on the table. (Id. 39.) 

December 21. — Votes against a motion to postpone the bill to restrain 

the issue of small notes in the District of Columbia. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837- 

1838, VI. 45.) 

December 22. — Votes against a motion to commit the bill to restrain the 
issue of small notes in the District of Columbia. Votes in favor of an 
amendment. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading. (G. 
25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 50.) 

* December 26. — Remarks on the bill to restrain the issue of small notes 
in the District of Columbia. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 51-52.) 

* Remarks on the bill authorizing the States to tax lands sold by the 
United States. (Id., Appendix, 17.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill to restrain the issue of small 
notes in the District of Columbia. (Id. 54.) 

December 27. — Participates in a debate on the bill authorizing the States 
to tax certain lands. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third 
reading. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 55-) 

December 28. — Presents the petition of the Union Bank of Georgetown 
to be reimbursed for certain losses. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 58.) 

Appointed a member of a select committee on the resolution to amend 
the Constitution. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 63.) 

December 29. — Votes in favor of an amendment to the bill relating to 
the punishment of crimes against the United States, substituting for the 
penalty of " death " that of " imprisonment at hard labor," for the crime of 
burning public buildings or documents. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 67.) 

Remarks on the claim of the executrix of Richard W. Meade. (Niles' 
Register, Jan. 6, 1838, LIII. 291-292.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1838 Ixi 

SENATE (Continued), 1838." 

January 2, 1838. — Presents the memorial of B. H. Lubitsh-Klimkiewitch 
for relief. (G. 25 C 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 70.) 

* Presents and comments upon a memorial from Philadelphia citizens, 
relative to the discharge of mechanics from the Philadelphia Navy-yard. 
(Id. 70; Niles' Register, Jan. 6, 1838, LIII. 292.) 

Presents memorials against the annexation of Texas, on the subject 
of abolition, for the alteration of certain post routes, and for a dry-dock at 
Philadelphia. (Id. 70.) 

January 3. — Presents petitions for a monument to General Washington, 
for the abolition of duties on f^our, and against the annexation of Texas. 
(G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 72,-) ^ 

Remarks and votes on Calhoun's resolutions on the slavery question. 
(Id. 74.) 

January 4. — Moves the adjournment of the Senate, which was agreed to. 

(G. 25 C. 2 s. 183771838, VI. 76.) . 

* Remarks during the discussion of Calhoun's resolutions against inter- 
meddling with slavery. (Id., Appendix, 23.) 

January 5. — Presents the petition of James Miller, to be indemnified for 
the loss of his plantation in the Florida War. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, 
VI. 79-) 

Moves to lay over for a day a report against the petition of the Union 
Bank of Georgetown for reimbursement for certain losses. (Id. 80.) 

Votes for a substitute for the proviso in Calhoun's third resolution on 
slavery, the substitute requiring that the resolution should not so be con- 
strued as to impair the freedom of speech or of the press or the right of 
petition. The substitute was adopted. (Id. 80, Appendix, 25.) Remarks 
on Calhoun's resolutions. (Id., Appendix, 30-31.) 

January 6. — Gives notice that he will, on the Monday following, intro- 
duce a bill to repeal the duties on certain imports. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, 
VI. 80.) 

Votes against an amendment to the third resolution of Calhoun on 
slavery, concerning the right of free speech and of the liberty of the press. 
(Id. 80.) Votes against an amendment to the third resolution. (Id. 81.) 
Votes in favor of adopting the third resolution. (Id. 81.) 

Januarv g. — Presents petitions relating to various subjects. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 
1837-1838, Vl. 87.) 

* Reports a bill, and speaks thereon, to enforce the laws relating to 
neutrality. (Id. 88.) 

Votes in favor of adopting Calhoun's fourth resolution as modified. (Id. 
88, Appendix, 53.) 

Introduces a bill to repeal certain portions of the act of July, 1832, 
relating to duties on imports. (Niles' Register, Jan. 13, 1838, LIII. 307.) 

January 10. — Presents the petition of Edward H. Clarke for compensa- 
tion for the services of George Clarke. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 91.) 

* Remarks on Calhoun's resolutions against intermeddling with slavery. 
(Id. 91, Appendix, 6r, 62, 63, 64, 65.) Votes in favor of a substitute for the 
fifth resolution, in relation to slavery in the District of Columbia. (Id., Ap- 
pendix, 62.) Moves to strike out that part of the resolution relating to 
Florida and the Indian territory. Motion adopted. (Id. 62,.) 

January 11. — Presents petitions. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 96.) 

* Remarks on Calhoun's resolutions as to slavery. Votes for an amend- 
ment to the resolution, affecting territories. Votes against a substitute reso- 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress. — s.=session. — *■— Printed herein. 



Ixii THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

lution. Votes in favor of adopting the resolution as modified. (Id. 06-07, 
Appendix, 69, 70, 12, 72, 73-74-) 

January 12. — Presents a petition for establishing New Castle as a poit 
of entry. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 98.) 

Votes against a motion to lay on the table the sixth resolution of 
Calhoun on slavery. Votes against a motion to lay on the table the resolu- 
tion vi^ith certain proposed amendments as to freedom of speech and liberty 
of the press. (Id. 98.) 

January 15. — Presents a petition against an international copyright bill. 
(G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 102.) 

* Remarks on the amendment of the neutrality laws. (Id. 103-104.) 
January 16. — Votes against a motion to lay on the table the question of 

the reception of resolutions of the Vermont Legislature for the abolition 
of slavery in the District of Columbia. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 112.) 

Moves to take up the bill amending the neutrality laws, which motion 
was lost. (Id. 112.) 

January 17. — Moves to take up the bill amending the neutrality laws, 
which was agreed to. Remarks on the subject. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, 
VI. 118.) 

January 18. — Moves to lay on the table and to order to be printed a 
report from the Secretary of the Treasury as to the amount of specie 
received at the Treasury, which motion was agreed to. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837- 
1838, VI. 119.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to lay on the table the motion to reconsider 
the vote making the Sub-Treasury Bill the order of the day for Tuesday 
fortnight. Votes against the motion to reconsider the vote. (Id. 120.) 

January 19. — Presents a memorial for the completion of the frigate 
Raritan. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 121.) 

Remarks on the bill for the relief of the executrix of Richard W. Meade. 
Votes against a motion to recommit. Votes in favor of the bill, which was 
passed. (Id. 121.) 

January 22. — Presents the petitions of Robert Milnor and John Thomp- 
son for remuneration for certain services. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 123.) 

* Reports a bill for the relief of General Thomas Sumpter. (Id. 123; 
S. Doc. 123, 25 C. 2 s.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill for the regulation of steamboats, 
prohibiting racing. (Id. 125.) 

January 23. — Aloves postponement of the bill for the relief of T. L. Win- 
throp and others, of the New England Mississippi Land Company, wliioh 
was agreed to. (G. 25 C. 2 s. VI. 130.) 

* January 24. — Votes against a motion to recommit the bill to increase 
the present military establishment, with instructions to increase regiments 
to three and fill up companies to sixty-eight. Remarks on the bill. (G. 25 C. 
2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 133.) 

January 25. — Votes against a motion to adjourn. Votes on various 
amendments to the bill granting the right of pre-emption to actual settlers on 
the public lands. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 137, 138.) 

January 26. — Votes against an amendment to the bill granting the right of 
pre-emption to actual settlers. Votes against a motion to postpone. (G. 25 
C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 144.) 

* January 27. — Remarks on the bill to grant the right of pre-emption 
to settlers on the public lands. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI., Appendix, 131. 
132.) Votes on various amendments. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill 



G.=Congressional Globe. — C.=Cons:ress. — s.=session. — *;^ Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1838 Ixiii 

for a third reading. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI., Appendix, 56, 57, I3i, 

1 32 133, 135.) 

January 29.— Presents a petition for the abolition of slavery in the 

District of Columbia. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. I47-) 

January 30. — Presents several memorials for an appropriation for the 
completion of the Raritan. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 148.) 

* Remarks on the bill to increase the present military establishment. 

(Id. 149.) , , , . 

Participates in the debate on a bill providing for the settlement of clanns 

to land derived from certain grants in Louisiana and Arkansas. Votes for 

the bill, which was passed. (Id. 149.) 

Votes aye on the passage of the bill to grant pre-emption rights to 
settlers on the public lands. (Id. 149, Appendix, 143.) 

February i. — Presents the petition of Major R. L. Baker for brevet pay; 
also memorials protesting against the passage of an international copyright 
law. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. I53-) 

Votes for a motion to amend the bill to impose additional duties upon 
certain officers as depositories. (Id. 153.) Votes for a provision of $3,000 
for the salary of the Receiver-General at New York. Agreed to. (Id. 154.) 

February 2. — Presents the petition of Colonel S. Miller for compensa- 
tion for certain property and for certain services. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, 

VI. 155-156.) 

Remarks in opposition to a bill for the relief of Thomas L. Winthrop and 
others. (Id. 156.) 

February 5. — Presents eight memorials for a marine hospital at Pitts- 
burg. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 160.) 

February 6. — Presents memorials for a marine hospital at Pittsburg. 
(G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 164.) 

* Remarks on a motion to refer the report of the Secretary of the 
Treasury on the amount of public moneys in the Commonwealth Bank at 
Boston. (Id. 166.) 

February 7. — Presents petitions on claims. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 
168.) 

* Remarks on a bill for the establishment of Oregon Territory. (Id. 
169.) 

* February 12. — Remarks on a national foundry for Maryland. (G. 25 
C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 177.) 

Presents a memorial for the establishment of a marine hospital at 
Pittsburg; also memorials from certain army officers for grant of lands. 

(Id. 177-178.) 

February 14. — Introduces a bill for regulating processes in the United 
States courts and providing for compensation of court officers, jurors, and 
witnesses. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 183.) 

* February 19. — Remarks on instructions of the Pennsylvania Legislature 
to vote against the Sub-Treasury Bill. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 190-191.) 

February 20. — Presents petitions for a marine hospital at Pittsburg ; also 
a petition for the completion of the Raritan. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 

^92.) 

* Remarks on instructions of the Pennsylvania Legislature to vote against 

the Sub-Treasury Bill. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 192.) 

Februarv 21. — Votes in favor of a motion to lay on the table the bill for 
the continuation of the Cumberland Road in Indiana, Illinois, and Mississippi. 
(G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 195.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



Ixiv THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

February 26. — Presents a memorial for a dry-dock at Philadelphia. (G. 
25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. I99-) 

* February 28. — Remarks on resolutions of the Democratic delegation of 
Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, concerning the Sub-Treasury Bill. (G. 
25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 202.) 

* March i. — Remarks on a memorial from delegates to a convention in 
Philadelphia to reform the Pennsylvania State constitution, concerning the 
Sub-Treasury Bill. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 204.) 

* Remarks on a memorial for the establishment of marine hospitals at 
Pittsburg and Erie. (Id. 204.) 

Remarks on the subject of brevet pay, with reference to the bill for the 
relief of Major-General Alexander Macomb. (Id. 204.) 

March 2. — Presents a memorial for the completion of the frigate 
Raritan. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 206.) 

March 3. — Presents the petition of Isabella Truxton, widow of Lieutenant 
Payne, for a pension. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 208.) 

March 5. — Presents the petition of Captain Britton Evans for reimburse- 
ment for the loss of certain property. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 214.) 

* Remarks on the bill to amend the neutrality laws. (Id. 214-215, 216.) 
Participates in the debate on a bill to establish a surveyor-general's 

office in Illinois. (Id. 216.) 

March 6. — Votes against a motion to strike from the bill to establish a 
surveyor-general's office in Illinois the salary of $2,000 and insert $1,200, 
which was agreed to. Votes for a motion to lay the bill on the table, which 
was agreed to. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 223.) 

♦Remarks on the bill to amend the neutrality laws. (Id. 223.) 

* Remarks on the Independent Treasury Bill. (Id. 223.) 

* March 7. — Remarks on the presentation of the proceedings of a meeting 
of Democrats of Philadelphia opposed to the Independent Treasury Bill. (G. 
25 C. 2 s. 1 837-1838, VI. 225.) 

Votes on his motion to postpone the Independent Treasury Bill and 
amendment; the motion was lost. (Id. 227.) 

* Remarks on the bill. (Id. 228-230.) 

* March 8. — Report of the conference on the amendment of the bill to 
amend the neutrality laws. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 260.) 

Votes against an amendment to the Independent Treasury Bill, providing 
for the employment of twenty-five banks whose stock is owned in whole or 
in part by the State in which they are established. (Id. 241.) 

* March 9. — Remarks on memorials presented by him for the establish- 
ment of a naval dry-dock at Philadelphia. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 231.) 

March 10. — Presents a petition, and speaks thereon, on the subject of the 
currency. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 232.) 

March 12. — Presents a memorial to suppress duelling. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 

1837-1838, VI. 235.) . , . ^^ 

March 14. — Presents a memorial for a dry-dock at Philadelphia. (G. 25 

C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 239.) 

Votes in favor of an amendment to a bill making appropriations for 
certain roads in Wisconsin. (Id. 239.) Moves that consideration of the bill 
be passed over informally, for the purpose of considering the Independent 
Treasury Bill, which was agreed to. (Id. 239.) 

* March 15. — Presents and comments upon the proceedings of a Demo- 
cratic meeting at Philadelphia in support of the Independent Treasury Bill. 
(G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 240.) 

Presents a memorial for a dry-dock at Philadelphia. (Id. 241.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1838 Ixv 

March 19. — Presents a petition for suitable accommodations for the 
United States courts in Philadelphia ; also a memorial against an international 
copyright bill. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 245.) 

March 20.— Presents memorials of the heirs of Thomas Lucas, praymg 
for commutation. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 247.) 

Votes in favor of laying on the table a resolution relative to the transfer 
of slaves from the United States to Texas. Motion carried. (Id. 247.) 

March 21. — Presents a petition protesting against the annexation of 
Texas ; also a petition for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. 
(G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 250.) 

Remarks on the printing of a report and accompanying documents m 
relation to the introduction of the cultivation of tropical plants in Florida. 

(Id. 250.) 

Moves to pass over informally the bill to change the times of holding the 
courts of the United States in the Ninth Circuit, which was agreed to. (Id. 

250.) 

Votes against an amendment to the Independent Treasury Bill. (Id. 

250, 251.) 

March 23.— Presents a memorial for the suppression of duelling; also a 
memorial of John P. Van Ness, President of the Metropolis Bank, concerning 
a mistake in correspondence transmitted to the Senate, between the bank 
and certain public departments. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 256.) 

March 24. — Votes on various amendments to the Independent Treasury 
Bill. Votes against engrossing the bill for a third reading, which was 
ordered. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 259-) 

March 26. — Presents a memorial for the suppression of duelling; also a 
memorial for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. (G. 25 C. 
2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 262.) 

Votes in favor of laying on the table the subject of certain memorials 
concerning the Cherokee treaty. (Id. 264.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to postpone the Independent Treasury Bill. 
Votes against the bill, which was passed. (Id. 264.) 

March 27.— Remarks on the subject of a memorial from Virginia relating 
to the exaction of specie payment. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 268.) 

Moves that the Secretary of War inform the Senate what portions of 
the estimates for the Cumberland Road might be dispensed with, which was 
agreed to. (Id. 269.) 

March 28.— Presents a memorial for the suppression of duelling; also a 
petition for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. (G. 25 C. 2 

s. 1837-1838, VI. 271.) 

* Remarks on a memorial concerning the affair of the Caroline. (Id. 

271.) 

Votes in favor of postponement of the bill for the relief of William R. 

Taylor. (Id. 272.) 

March 29. — Presents a petition for the suppression of duelling. (G. 25 
C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 274.) 

Moves the reference of a petition previously presented by him on the 
subject of international copyright to the Committee on Patents, which was 
agreed to. (Id. 274.) 

April 9. — Presents a petition on the subject of duelling. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 
1837-1838. VI. 292.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of a bill to prohibit the giving or acceptmg 
of a challenge in the District of Columbia. The bill was passed. _ (Id. 292.) 

Makes and speaks upon a motion to postpone the bill concerning the act 

G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 
V 



Ixvi THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

to establish the northern boundary of Ohio and to provide for the admission 
of Michigan. (Id. 295.) 

April 10. — Presents a petition against the passage of the international 
copyright bill; also a petition on the subject of duelling. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837- 
1838, VI. 296.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to postpone indefinitely the bill for the 
relief of Bolitha Laws. (Id. 296.) 

* April II. — Remarks on relations with Mexico. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837- 
1838, VI. 299-300, 301.) 

April 12. — Presents the proceedings of a meeting in the county of Wash- 
ington, Pennsylvania, opposed to duelling. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 302.) 

Votes in favOr of an amendment to the bill to provide for the graduation 
and reduction of the price of public lands. (Id. 303.) 

Votes against engrossing the bill for a third reading, which was ordered. 

(Id. 303-) 

April 13. — Presents a petition concerning the Cherokee treaty; also a 
petition on the subject of duelling. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 304.) 

* Remarks on the bill providing for the reduction and graduation of the 
price of public lands. (Id. 304""305-) 

Votes against the passage of the bill. (Id. 305.) 

April 17.— Remarks on the bill for the relief of Thomas L. Winthrop and 
others, of the New England Mississippi Land Company. Votes in favor of 
engrossing the bill for a third reading, which was ordered. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 

1837-1838, VI. 313.) . , . 

April 18.— Remarks on the consideration of the bill m relation to pre- 
venting the reissue and circulation of bills, notes, and other securities of 
corporations created by acts of Congress which have expired. (G. 25 C 2 s. 

1837-1838, VI. 315.) , . . 

Remarks in favor of a bill to establish a board of commissioners to 

examine claims against the United States. (Id. 316.) 

April 19. — Votes against a motion to postpone consideration of the 

resolution fixing a day for adjournment. Motion carried. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 

1837-1838, VI. 318.) . 

April 20.— Participates in debate, supporting the bill to prevent the 
reissue and circulation of expired bills, notes, and other securities of corpora- 
tions created by Congress. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third 
reading. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 3I9-) • • r 

* April 23.— Speech on the bill to prevent the reissue and circulation of 
expired bills, notes, and other securities of corporations created by Congress. 
(G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 323, 324, Appendix, 304-310.) Votes in favor 
of the bill, which was passed. (Id. 324.) 

April 24.— Presents a memorial of the Philadelphia Chamber of Com- 
merce for certain improvements in navigation ; also a memorial of Walter R. 
Johnson for an institution for researches in physical science. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 

1837-1838, VI. 326.) . 

April 25.— Participates in debate, supporting the bill to establish a board 
of commissioners to consider claims against the United States. Votes against 
a motion to lay the matter on the table, with a view to the appointment of 
a select committee to inquire into the subject of claims. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837- 

1838, VI. 334.) , ^ , .... 

April 26.— Moves the printing and reference of a memorial previously 
presented by him for the repair of piers at Reedy Island, in the Delaware, 
which was agreed to. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 336.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill to establish a board of commis- 



G.=Congressional Globe.-C.=Congress.-s.=session.— * -Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1838 Ixvii 

sioners to examine claims against the United States, reducing the compen- 
sation of the commissioners. Remarks advocating the bill. Votes in favor 
of engrossing the bill for a third reading, which was ordered. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 

1837-1838, VI. 337.) 

April 27. — Votes in favor of an amendment to the bill to provide for the 
security of the emigrant and other Indians west of Missouri and Arkansas. 
(G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 340.) 

May 2. — Presents and comments upon memorials against international 
copyright legislation ; also memorials relating to making New Castle a port 
of entry, to the discovery of Espy as to causes of storms, to the annexation 
of Texas, and to the abolition of slavery. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 351.) 

Votes for the bill to provide for the security of the emigrant and other 
Indians west of Missouri and Arkansas, which was passed. (Id. 352.) 

* Remarks on the joint resolution on the subject of currency discrimina- 
tions. Votes in favor of a motion to refer the resolution to the Committee 
on Finance. (Id. 352, Appendix, 296.) 

* May 7. — Remarks on a bill to increase the salary of the Commissioner 
of the General Land Office. Votes against engrossing the bill for a third 
reading. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 356.) 

Votes in favor of the indefinite postponement of the bill to increase the 
salaries of certain district judges. (Id. 357.) 

May 10. — Presents and comments upon a memorial of the trustees of 
the University of Pennsylvania, for the grant of public lands to it and other 
institutions for educational purposes. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 360.) 

Remarks on a bill for the erection of a hospital in the District of 
Columbia; moves postponement of the subject, which was agreed to. (Id. 
360.) 

Remarks on the question of further considering the bill to continue the 
corporate existence of the banks of the District of Columbia. (Id. 361.) 

Moves consideration of executive business, which was agreed to. (Id. 

361.) 

* May II. — Remarks on the bill to continue the corporate existence of 
the banks of the District of Columbia. Moves to strike out the 2d section of 
the bill. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 365, 366.) The amendment was agreed 
to. (Id. 368.) 

Moves an amendment to the 2Qth section, to compel banks to keep on 
hand coin equal to one-fourth of their private deposits, as well as of their 
circulation. Remarks on the amendment. (Id. 368.) 

May 12. — Presents a memorial concerning the Cherokee treaty. (G. 25 
C. 2 s. ^837-1838, VI. 372.) 

May 14. — Remarks on his amendment to the 29th section of the bill to 
continue the corporate existence of banks in the District of Columbia. (G. 25 
C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 373.) 

May 16. — Votes against a motion, which was carried, to print 30,000 
copies of the report of the Committee on Finance on Clay's joint resolution 
as to currency discriminations. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 379.) 

May 17. — Votes against a motion to lay on the table a resolution offered 
by Mr. Allen for an inquiry into the condition of the banks in the District 
of Columbia that have applied for an extension of their charters. (G. 25 
C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 381.) Votes in favor of a similar motion subsequently 
made. (Id. 382.) 

Votes in favor of his amendment to the 29th section of the bill to con- 
tinue the corporate existence of the banks of the District of Columbia. 
Amendment rejected. Votes in favor of an amendment to the 29th section, 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*= Printed herein. 



Ixviii THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

which in effect was to require hanks to keep on hand coin equal to one-third 
of their circulation. Amendment adopted. (Id. 382.) 

May 18. — Votes against an amendment to the bill to authorize the issuing 
of Treasury notes to meet current expenses of the Government, by limiting 
the issue to $2,000,000. Amendment rejected. Votes in favor of engrossing 
the bill for a third reading, which was ordered. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, 

VI. 391 •) 

May 21. — Presents a memorial from merchants and underwriters of 
Philadelphia for a law requiring at least sixty days' notice before wrecked 
property could be sold. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 396.) 

* Remarks on a plan presented by Mr. Clay for a Bank of the United 
States. (Id. 397-398.) 

Remarks on the bill to continue the corporate existence of banks in the 
District of Columbia for twenty years. (Id. 399.) Moves to modify Benton's 
substitute requiring the banks to resume sooner than January i, 1839, if the 
principal banks in Baltimore and Richmond should resume sooner, which 
amendment was accepted by Mr. Benton. Moves to strike out the second 
clause of Benton's proviso, relating to the notes of other banks, which was 
agreed to. Votes in favor of Benton's substitute for the bill, which was 
adopted. (Id. 399.) 

May 22. — Presents a petition for a Bank of the United States. (G. 25 
C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 401.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill amending the act giving the 
assent of Congress to the act of the Virginia Legislature incorporating the 
Falmouth and Alexandria Railroad Company, by appropriating $300,000. 
Votes against ordering the bill to be engrossed for a third reading, which 
was ordered. (Id. 404.) 

* May 23. — Votes on various amendments to the bill for the continuation 
of the Cumberland Road through the States of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. 
Remarks on the clause appropriating $9,000 for a bridge on the part of the 
road leading through Pennsylvania. Votes against a motion to reduce the 
appropriation of the bill from $150,000 to $100,000. Motion lost. Votes in 
favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading, which was ordered. (G. 25 
C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 407-408.) 

May 24. — Votes aye on the passage of the bill for the continuation of 
the Cumberland Road through Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 

1837-1838, VI. 409- ) 

May 25. — Votes against a motion to strike from the Naval Appropriation 
Bill the appropriation for an exploring expedition. Motion lost. (G. 25 C. 

2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 411.) 

* Remarks on Clay's resolution on currency discriminations. (Id. 411, 

Appendix, 346-347-) 

May 26. — Votes in favor of several motions striking out part of the 
resolution on currency discriminations. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 412.) 

May 28. — Presents a memorial of William B. Stokes for remuneration 
for losses sustained in consequence of the Postmaster-General's refusal to 
pay an award of the Solicitor of the Treasury; also memorials remonstrating 
against the Cherokee treaty. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 415.) 

Votes against an amendment to Clay's resolution on currency discrimina- 
tions. Votes in favor of engrossing the resolution, which was ordered. (Id. 

4I5-) 

May 29.— Votes aye on the passage of Clay's resolution on currency dis- 
criminations. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838. VI. 416.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1838 Ixix 

May 30.— Votes to lay on the table the bill for the relief of John J. 
Boulou. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 417-) 

May 31.— Presents the petition of F. P. Blair for certain relief. (G. 25 

C. 2 s. ■1837-1838, VI. 419.) ^ , .^, 

Remarks on presentation of petitions for a United States Bank. (Id. 

419-) 

Participates in a debate on a bill in regard to the town of Southport, 

Territory of Wisconsin; votes in favor of the bill, which was passed. 

(Id. 421.) 

* June 12. — Remarks on petitions presented by Mr. Webster for the 
repeal of the portion of the deposit act of 1836 which prohibited the receipt 
by the Government of notes of banks which, since the act, had issued notes 
of less than $5 denomination. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 448.) 

Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading the bill to encourage 
the cultivation of tropical plants in the United States. (Id. 449.) 

June 13. — Remarks on the question of the consideration of a bill for the 
relief of Major-General Macomb. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 450.) 

Votes against engrossing for a third reading a bill to set apart a belt of 
land on the western borders of Missouri and Arkansas, as bounty land for 
settlers engaged for a term of years in the defence of the frontier. (Id. 450.) 

June 14. — Presents the proceedings of a Democratic meeting in Phila- 
delphia in favor of the Independent Treasury Bill ; also a memorial in favor 
of the Independent Treasury Bill, and against a National Bank. (G. 25 C. 
2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 452.) 

Remarks on the question of the consideration of Mr. Williams's motion 
for leave to bring in a bill for a joint commission to survey the northeastern 
boundary of the United States on the basis of the treaty of 1783. (Id. 453-) 

Moves the discharge of the Committee on Foreign Relations from further 
consideration of the petition of George T. Byard, and its reference to the 
Committee on Claims. (Id. 453.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to lay on the table a joint resolution on the 
annexation of Texas. Motion prevailed. (Id. 453.) 

June 16. — Presents memorials in favor of the Independent Treasury 
Bill. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 455- ) 

Reports the House bill for settlement of the accounts of Richard Harris, 
late United States commercial agent in Spain. (Id. 455-) 

Votes against various amendments to the bill establishing a surveyor- 
general's office in Michigan. Votes against a motion to lay the bill on the 
table. (Id. 455-456.) 

Votes against engrossing for a third reading the bill for the relief of 
Major-General Alexander Macomb. (Id. 456.) 

June 18. — Presents memorials in favor of the Sub-Treasury Bill, and 
against a United States Bank; also a petition against an international copy- 
right law ; also a petition for a diplomatic agent to Hayti, and commercial 
regulations with that country. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 457.) 

* Speech on a motion for leave to bring in a bill for a joint commission 
to survey the northeastern boundary according to the provisions of the treaty 
of peace of 1783. (Id. 457, Appendix, 382-387.) 

June 19. — Remarks on the bill to grant pre-emption to settlers on the 
public lands. Votes on several House amendments to the bill. Votes in 
favor of concurring in the House amendments to the bill as amended. (G. 
25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 462, 463.) 

June 20. — Presents memorials in favor of the Independent Treasury Bill 
and against a United States Bank. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 464.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session. — *=Priiited herein. 



Ixx THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading the bill for abolishing 
imprisonment for debt in certain cases. So ordered. (Id. 464.) 

Participates in a debate on Mr. Williams's motion for leave to bring in 
a bill for the survey of the northeastern boundary of the United States 
according to the treaty of 1783, and, the bill having been introduced, advo- 
cates its reference to the Committee on Foreign Relations. (Id. 464, 465.) 

June 22. — Presents a petition in favor of the Independent Treasury Bill 
and against a United States Bank. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 473-) 

June 25. — Presents memorials in favor of the Independent Treasury Bill 
and against a United States Bank. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 478.) 

Votes against a motion to rescind that part of the resolution requiring 
original papers on private claims not to be withdrawn, but allowing copies 
to be made for certain compensation, which required compensation for 
copies obtained. Motion prevailed. Votes against Sevier's motion to rescind 
the whole rule, which motion was lost. (Id. 478.) 

* Remarks on a resolution fixing the day of adjournment. (Id. 478-479.) 
Votes aye on the passage of the bill for the benefit of the Alabama, 

Florida, and Georgia Railroad Company. (Id. 479-) 

* June 26. — Remarks on the resolution fixing a day of adjournment. 
Votes against Benton's motion to postpone the consideration of the resolution. 
(G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 481.) 

Remarks on introducing a bill supplementary to the act to establish the 
Treasury Department. (Id. 481.) 

*June 27. — Remarks on offering as a substitute for Mr. Webster's bill 
for the collection of the public revenue a bill introduced on June 26, 1838. 
(G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 483, Appendix, 399-401.) 

Participates in the discussion of the bill to divide the State of Delaware 
into two collection districts. (Id. 483.) 

* June 28. — Remarks on his substitute for Webster's bill for the collection 
of the public revenue. (G. 25 C 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 485, Appendix, 466-467.) 

Votes against engrossing for a third reading a bill to purchase the right 
to use in the Army and Navy a certain vapor bath. (Id. 485.) 

June 29.— Remarks on his substitute for Webster's bill for the collection 
of the public revenue. Votes against two amendments and in favor of one 
amendment, all of which were rejected. Votes in favor of his own substitute, 
which was adopted. Votes in favor of the bill as amended. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 

1837-1838, VI. 487-) . . 

June 30.— Votes in favor of an amendment to Mr. Wright's bill modifymg 
the deposit act of 1836, which prohibited the reception, by the Government, 
of the notes of banks that had issued notes of a less denomination than $5. 
(G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838. VI. 488.) 

July 2.— Participates in a debate on a bill makmg further provision tor 
the discharge of debenture bonds in certain cases. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, 

VI. 490.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill modifying the bill of 1836, which 
prohibited the reception, by the Government, of the notes of banks that had 
issued notes of a. less denomination than $5. The bill was passed. (Id. 491.) 

July 3. — Participates in a discussion on a motion to print 5,000 extra 
copies of a report of the Naval Committee relative to the discovery of the 
longitude by the dip of the needle. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 493-) 

July 4.— Remarks on a bill regulating the pay of brevet officers, favoring 
an amendment including General Jones. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 496.) 

* Presents a report on the northeastern boundary, with resolutions. (S. 
Doc. 502, 25 C. 2 s. ; S. Doc. 287, 25 C. 3 s. ; G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 496.) 

G.=CongressionalGlobe.-C.=Congress.-s.=session.-*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1838 Ixxi 

July 6. — Remarks on a motion for the indefinite postponement of the 
Harbor Bill. Votes against the motion, which was lost. Votes on various 
amendments to the bill. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third 
reading, but the question was decided in the negative. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837- 
1838, VI. 501.) 

jjily 7. — Votes in favor of an amendment to the Indian Appropriation 
Bill, adding $260,000 for helpless Indians removed west of the Mississippi. 
I'he amendment was agreed to. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1837-1838, VI. 504.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to reconsider the vote of the previous day, 
rejecting the Harbor Bill. Votes in favor of a motion to recommit the bill 
with certain instructions. The bill being subsequently reported, participates 
in a debate on it. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading. 
Bill subsequently passed. (Id. 504.) 

Participates in a debate on an amendment to the Fortifications Bill, by 
following the appropriation for Fort Delaware, on Pea Patch Island, with 
an authorization to the Executive to secure the title by purchase or inquest; 
votes in favor of the amendment. Participates in a debate on a motion to 
strike out the above appropriation, and votes against the motion. (Id. 505.) 

December 3. — Appears as a Senator from Pennsylvania. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 
1838-183Q, VII. I.) 

December 5. — Gives notice that on the next day he will bring in a bill for 
the relief of Thomas Sumpter. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 9.) 

Suggests balloting for chairman of the Committee on Commerce, which 
is agreed to. (Id. 16.) 

December 6. — Announced as chairman of the Committee on Foreign 
Relations. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 17; S. Doc. 3, 25 C. 3 s.) 

Presents the petition of Joseph C. Cornwall for a pension. (Id. 17.) 

Introduces a bill for the relief of Thomas Sumpter. (Id. 18.) 

December 10. — Moves reference to the Committee on Foreign Relations 
of that part of the President's annual message relating to foreign affairs. 
Motion adopted. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 20.) 

December 12. — Presents the memorial of Commodore David Porter for 
pension arrearages. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 25.) 

December 17. — Votes against an amendment to the bill to postpone the 
fourth instalment of the deposit act, postponing the instalment to January 
I, 1840. Amendment lost. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 37.) 

December 18. — Presents a petition of Andrew Logan for lands to be 
used in the culture of silk. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 41.) 

* Presents and comments upon the petition of James P. Espy as to rain- 
making. (Id. 41-42.) Moves to lay the petition on the table. Motion 
carried. (Id. 42.) 

* Remarks on an amendment to the Appropriations Bill, providing for 
pensions to the widows of Revolutionary officers. (Id. 44, 46.) 

References, in remarks of Mr. Strange, to votes on certain questions. 

(Id. 46, 47-) 

* December 19. — Remarks and resolution of inquiry as to the expediency 
of providing for the construction of one or more steam vessels of war. (G. 

25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 48.) 

December 21. — Votes in favor of the amendment to the Appropriations 
Bill, providing for pensions to the widows of Revolutionary officers. Amend- 
ment rejected. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 59.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



Ixxii THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

SENATE (Continued), 1839. 

January 2, 1839. — Presents a memorial for establishing New Castle as a 
port of entry; also a memorial of J. C. White for correction of error in 
naturalization papers; a memorial asking that vaccine may be transmitted 
by mail free of postage ; and a memorial for the improvement of the 
Chesapeake and Delaware Canal. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 92.) 

January 3. — Votes in favor of laying on the table the question of receiving 
a memorial against the admission of any new State into the Union whose 
constitution should tolerate slavery, and against the annexation of Texas. 
(G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 95.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to lay on the table the question of receiving 
a petition for the abolition of the sale and transfer of slaves from one State 
to another. (Id. 95.) 

Presents a petition of Cadwallader Evans concerning his invention to 
prevent the explosion of steam-boilers. (Id. 95.) 

Votes in favor of recommitting the bill for the graduation and reduction 
of the price of the public lands. Votes in favor of instructions to amend 
the bill so as to limit the sales, at the reduced prices, to actual settlers. (Id. 
95, Appendix, 53.) 

January 4. — Presents a memorial for the clearing out of the harbor of 
Philadelphia at the mouth of the Delaware and Chesapeake Canal and in the 
Delaware. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 97.) 

* January 5.— Remarks on a resolution providing that the front seats of 
the eastern gallery of the Senate be set apart for reporters. Votes in favor 
of postponing the resolution indefinitely. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. loi.) 

January 7. — Presents a memorial of S. R. Slaymaker for compensation for 
carrying mail. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 103.) 

January 9. — Votes in favor of laying on the table a motion to print certain 
resolutions of the Virginia Legislature against the annexation of Texas and 
on the subject of slavery. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. no.) 

* Remarks on the bill for carrying into effect the convention between 
the United States and Texas, and marking the boundary between the two 
countries. (Id. no.) 

* Votes on and offers various amendments to the bill to provide for the 
graduation and reduction of the price of public lands. (Id. no.) 

January 10. — Presents a petition of Simon Brewster for increase of 
pension. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 111-112.) 

Remarks in opposition to and votes against various amendments to tlie 
public land bill. (Id. 112, 129.) 

January n.— Remarks on the bill for the reduction and graduation of 
the price of public lands. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. ii4-) 

Votes against a motion to adjourn. (Id. 114.) 

January 14.— Votes against a motion to postpone indefinitely the bill for 
the reduction and graduation of the price of public lands. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838- 
1839, VII. 121.) 

January iS.—Votcs against a motion to adjourn. Votes agamst an 
amendment that when so much of the public land in any State shall be sold 
as to leave but 2,000,000 acres, the remainder shall be ceded to the State. 
Amendment rejected. Votes against a motion to adjourn. Later, votes for 
such a motion. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 126.) . ^, • 

January 16.— Presents a petition for improvmg the navigation of the Ohio 
River. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839- VII. 127.) 

G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Consress.—s.-=session.—*-Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1839 Ixxiii 

Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading the bill for the reduction 
and graduation of the price of public lands; which was ordered. (Id. 127.) 

* January 17. — Remarks on Clay's amendment to the bill for the gradu- 
ation and reduction of the price of public lands. Votes in favor of the bill, 
which was passed. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 130, Appendix, 60-61.) 

January 18. — Votes against laying on the table a motion to reconsider the 
vote on striking out the enacting clause of the bill for the continuation of 
the Cumberland Road. Votes against the motion to strike out the enacting 
clause. Votes in favor of ordering the bill to be engrossed for a third read- 
ing. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 133.) 

Remarks on a petition in relation to the circuit and district courts of 
Arkansas. (Id. 132.) 

January 21. — Presents a memorial of Susan Bainbridge for a pension. 
(G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 135.) 

January 22. — Votes against Clay's amendment to the bill prohibiting chal- 
lenges to duels in the District of Columbia. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 

139- ) 

January 23. — Votes in favor of the passage of the bill to prohibit chal- 
lenges to duels in the District of Columbia. The bill was passed. (G. 25 C. 

3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 141.) 

Moves consideration of the bill for the relief of John Campbell White, 
of Baltimore, which was agreed to; and makes remarks in its favor. (Id. 
142.) 

January 24. — Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading the bill to 
amend the act to authorize Tennessee to issue grants and perfect titles to 
certain lands. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 144.) 

January 28. — Moves reference to the Committee on Military Affairs of the 
petition of Britton Evans for compensation for losses by shipwreck. (G. 25 

C 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 149- ) 

* January 29. — Remarks on a bill to repeal the duty on salt and the 
fishing bounties. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 157, Appendix, 75-76.) Votes 
against a motion to lay the whole subject on the table. (Id. 157.) 

January 30. — Presents a memorial of Samuel Raub, Jr., relative to steam- 
boilers and safety-valves. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 158.) 

Votes against a motion to lay on the table Benton's resolution calling 
upon the Secretary of the Treasury for a statement of the deficiency which 
would have resulted had the bill for the distribution of the proceeds of the 
public lands been enacted. Votes in favor of the resolution, which was 
adopted. (Id. 158.) 

Votes against granting leave to Mr. Benton to introduce a bill repealing 
the duty on salt. (Id. 159.) 

Participates in a debate on a joint resolution directing the manner in 
which certain laws of the District are to be executed. (Id. 159.) 

Januarv 31. — Reports a bill for the relief of Charles S. Walsh. (G. 25 
C. 3 s. 1838-1^839, VII. 160.) 

February 2. — Presents a memorial for an artificial harbor at the mouth 
of the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 164.) 

February 4. — Presents a petition for a steam revenue-cutter on Lake Erie ; 
also a petition for an artificial harbor at the mouth of the Chesapeake and 
Delaware Canal; and a petition of Job Whittall, of Philadelphia, for relief. 
(G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 168.) 

February 5. — Presents a petition of Mary E. Shaw and the executors of 
John E. Shaw. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 172.) 

February 6. — Votes against a motion to postpone indefinitely the bill 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Coiigress. — s.=session.—*= Printed herein. 



Ixxiv THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

providing for an armed occupation of that part of the Territory of Florida 
which is overrun by Indians. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 174.) 

February 8. — Reports bills for the settlement of the accounts of Edward 
Roberts and for the relief of Benjamin Hewitt; also, with a recommendation 
for indefinite postponement, bills for the relief of Cornelius Manning and 
Benjamin Hodges. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 179.) 

* Remarks on Morris's resolution on the subject of slavery. Votes 
against laying the motion to consider the resolution on the table. (Id. 179.) 

February 9. — Reports a bill for relief of the legal representatives of Brad- 
ford, deceased. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 180.) 

Votes against a motion to postpone indefinitely the bill for the armed 
occupation of that part of Florida overrun by Indians. (Id. 181.) 

February 12. — Remarks on the bill to prevent the interference of Federal 
officers in elections. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 189.) 

* February 14. — Speech on the bill to prevent the interference of Federal 
officers in elections. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 194, Appendix, 203-210.) 

February 16. — Presents a memorial of Edward D. Tippet. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 

1838-1839, VII. 199- ) 

February 18.— Votes against a substitute for the bill more effectually to 
secure public money in the hands of Government officers and agents and 
to punish defaulters. Votes against an amendment providing that deposits 
in any bank shall be at the credit of the United States Treasurer. Votes in 
favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, 
VII. 202.) 

February 19. — Votes in favor of the passage of the bill for the armed 
occupation and settlement of Florida. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 205.) 

February 20. — Presents a petition of Reynell Coates for compensation ; 
also a memorial for a new custom-house in Philadelphia. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 
1838-1839, VII. 207.) 

February 26. — Votes against the postponement of the bill concerning the 
powers of the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia. Votes against 
recommitment of the bill. Votes in favor of the passage of the bill. (G. 25 
C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 221.) 

Remarks on a bill to revive the act enabling claimants to lands in 
Missouri and Arkansas to try the validity of their claims. (Id. 221.) 

* Remarks on the President's message concerning the dispute as to the 
Maine boundary. (Id. 223, Appendix, 210-212.) Moves reference of the 
message to the Foreign Relations Committee, which was agreed to. (Id. 223.) 

* February 28. — Reports resolutions on the dispute as to the Maine 
boundary. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 229; S. Doc. 272, 25 C. 3 s.) 

Votes against Webster's amendment to the Army Appropriations Bill, 
appropriating $272,000 for the services of the Massachusetts militia during 
the last war with Great Britain. (Id. 230.) 

March i. — Participates in a debate on a resolution that a letter from 
the Postmaster-General be laid before the President, with a request for the 
Postmaster-General's dismissal. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 234.) 

Votes against Benton's amendment to the Army Appropriations Bill, 
appropriating $740,000 for the repair and completion of fortifications. (Id. 

234) 

* Remarks on the resolutions concerning the dispute as to the Maine 

boundary. (Id. 308, 309-310, 311, 314-315. 3i6.) Votes against Webster'^s 
motion to change the resolutions so as to define more exactly what Maine's 
position should be. (Id. 316.) 

March 2. — Votes in favor of a motion that the Senate insist on its 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Cong:ress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1840 Ixxv 

amendment to the Civil and Diplomatic Appropriations Bill, striking out a 
provision for the distribution of the Documentary History among the mem- 
bers of Congress. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 238.) 

Remarks on a resolution accepting as satisfactory the disclaimer by the 
Postmaster-General of disrespect to the Senate. (Id. 238.) 

Votes against amendments to the bill for the protection of the northern 
and northwestern frontier, appropriating various sums for Maine, the West, 
and the Atlantic and Gulf coast. (Id. 238.) 

* Remarks on the bill to give the President additional powers to defend 
the country against invasion. (Id. 238, 239-240.) Votes against a motion 
to strike out the provision for raising 50,000 volunteers. Votes in favor of 
engrossing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 240.) 

March 3. — Remarks on a bill to authorize the construction of certain 
improvements in Wisconsin. (G. 25 C. 3 s. 1838-1839, VII. 245.) 

Votes in favor of agreeing to the report of the Committee of Conference 
on amendments to the General Appropriation Bill. (Id. 246.) 

Votes in favor of a motion that the Senate adjourn. (Id. 247.) 

December 2.— Appears as a Senator from Pennsylvania. (G. 26 C. i s. 
1839-1840, VIII. I.) 

December 16. — Appointed chairman of the Committee on Foreign Rela- 
tions and a member of the Committee on Manufactures. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839- 
1840, VIII. 54; S. Doc. 3, 26 C. I s.) 

December 24. — Motion, and remarks thereon, for printing 3,500 addi- 
tional copies of the report of the Secretary of the Treasury. Motion agreed 
to. (G. 26 C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 78-79.) 

December 27. — Presents the petition of Daniel Palmer for increase of 
pension: also a memorial for increase of salary of the judge of the Western 
District of Pennsylvania ; a memorial for a post route in Lancaster County, 
Pennsylvania; and the petition of Abraham Coote for increase of pension. 
(G. 26 C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 81.) 

(Gives notice that on the following day he will ask leave to introduce a 
bill for the relief of Samuel R. Slaymaker. (Id. 81.) 

Moves that the part of the President's annual message relating to foreign 
affairs be referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations, which was agreed 
to. (Id. 83.) 

December 29. — Presents a memorial for reduction of postage rates. (G. 
26 C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 86.) 

Introduces a bill for the relief of Samuel R. Slaymaker. (Id. 86.) 

SENATE (Continued), 1840. 

January 3, 1840. — Votes against a motion to reconsider the reference to 
the Committee on Public Lands of the bill for ceding public lands to States 
within which they are situated. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840. VIII. 98.) 

January 4. — Votes against a motion to postpone the Independent Treasury 
Bill. (G. 26 C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII., Appendix, 108.) 

January 6. — Presents a memorial from certain army officers of the line 
for equalization of pay with the staff ; also a memorial of William Strickland 
and others for permission to import free of duty a publication of a descrip- 
tion of the public works of the United States. Moves to refer to the Com- 
mittee on Pensions the petition of John R. Midwinter and the case of 
Elizabeth Truxton. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 102.) 

January 7. — Votes against a motion to lay on the table Benton's resolution 
relative to the assumption of State debts. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 105.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*= Printed herein. 



Ixxvi THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

January g. — Presents a memorial of American citizens at Malaga, King- 
dom of Spain, for provision of a place of burial. (G. 26 C. I s. 1839-1840, 
VIII. 108.) 

* January 10. — Remarks on a memorial from the Legislative Council of 
Iowa for a settlement of the boundary line betvi^een Iowa Territory and 
Missouri. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 112.) 

January 14. — Moves that the representatives of John Brooks have leave 
to withdraw their petition and papers. Motion adopted. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839- 
1840, VIII. 120.) 

Votes against postponing the bill for the collection and disbursement 
of the public money. (Id. 120.) Votes in favor of an amendment increas- 
ing the salary of the receiver at New York. Votes in favor of an amendment 
increasing the salaries of the receivers at other ports. Moves an amendment 
for the increase of the salaries of the receivers at Philadelphia and New 
Orleans; remarks on the motion. (Id. 120.) 

January 15. — Remarks on a resolution calling for correspondence relating 
to the dispute as to the northeastern boundary. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, 
VIII. 122.) 

Accepts a modification of his amendment to the bill for the collection 
and disbursement of the public money, as to the amount of increase of the 
salaries of the receivers at Philadelphia and New Orleans. (Id. 122.) 

January 16. — Remarks on the consideration of the resolution calling for 
correspondence relating to the dispute as to the northeastern boundary. (G. 
26 C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 124.) 

Votes in favor of an amendment to the Sub-Treasury Bill, striking out 
the clauses which permitted the reception and disbursement of Federal paper. 
(Id., Appendix, 125.) 

January 17. — Moves that the Senate take up the consideration of the 
resolution calling for correspondence relating to the northeastern boundary 
dispute, which was agreed to. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 126.) 

* Remarks on the subject of the resolution. (Id. 126-127.) 
Participates in the discussion on the Independent Treasury Bill. Votes 

in favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 127.) 

January 20. — Votes in favor of the passage of the bill for the armed 

occupation and settlement of that part of Florida infested by marauding 

Indians. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 130.) 

January 21. — Moves that the Independent Treasury Bill be informally 

passed over, which was agreed to. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 130; Niles' 

Register, Jan. 28, 1840, LVII. 347.) 

* January 22. — Speech in reply to Mr. Clay on the Independent Treasury 
Bill. (G. 26 C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 133, Appendix, 129-137.) 

January 23. — Presents a memorial for a steam revenue-cutter on Dela- 
ware Bay. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 139.) Remarks on the memorial. 
(Niles' Register, Feb. i, 1840, LVII. 363.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the Independent Treasury Bill. (G. 26 
C. I -s. 1839-1840, VIII. 141.) 

* January 24. — Presents a memorial for a duty on silk. (G. 26 C. i s. 
1839-1840, VIII. 143.) 

February 3. — Presents a number of petitions on various subjects. (G. 26 
C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 158.) 

February 5. — Votes against a motion to lay on the table a report of the 
select committee on the assumption by the Government of State debts. Votes 
in favor of printing the usual number of copies of the report. (G. 26 C. i s. 
1839-1840, VIII. 164.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1840 Ixxvii 

February 7.— Presents a memorial for a duty on silk. (G. 26 C. i s. 
1839-1840, VIII. 171.) 

February 10. — Presents a petition for carrying into effect certain treaty 
stipulations with the Sioux Indians; also memorials for a duty on silk. 
(G. 26 C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 176.) 

* February 11. — Presents a memorial relating to the use of bloodhounds 
in the Seminole War. Remarks on the subject. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, 
VIII. 183-184.) 

Presents a memorial for a duty on silk. (Id. 184.) 
February 13. — Presents memorials for a duty on silk ; also a petition of 
the widow of Samuel Jamison. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 187.) 

* Remarks on a petition for the abolition of slavery. (Id. 188-189, 197.) 
February 14. — Presents memorials against the use of bloodhounds in the 

Seminole War; also a petition for the repeal of laws conflicting with the 
Constitution; and a petition for the abolition of the foreign slave trade. (G. 
26 C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 198.) 

* Presents a petition for a duty on umbrellas. (Id. 198.) 

February 17. — Remarks on Hazard's United States Commercial and 
Statistical Register. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 201.) 

Presents memorials relating respectively to a duty on silk, the use of 
bloodhounds in the Seminole War, and the abolition of slavery. (Id. 201.) 

Presents a petition of Hugh Stewart. (Id. 203.) 

* Remarks on a resolution on the assumption of State debts. (Id. 205.) 
February 18. — Presents a memorial for a duty on silk. (G. 26 C. i s. 

1839-1840, VIII. 207.) 

February 20. — Votes against Clay's motion to postpone indefinitely the 
subject of the assumption of State debts. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 
213.) Remarks during the discussion of the subject. (Id., Appendix, 184.) 

February 21. — Participates in a discussion on a resolution to amend the 
joint rules that no claim which had been twice reported in either House, 
adversely, should again be presented. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 218.) 

* February 24. — Remarks on the question of a bankrupt law. (G. 26 C. 
I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 220.) 

Offers a resolution to inquire into the expediency of amending the 
Constitution so as to prohibit the issue and circulation of paper currency 
of a low denomination. (Id. 220.) 

Votes in favor of concurring in a House amendment to the bill relating 
to taking the sixth census. (Id. 221.) 

February 25. — Presents a memorial for revision of the duty on woollen 
goods ; also petitions as to the sale and transfer of American vessels abroad 
and for the suppression of the slave trade ; and memorials against the use of 
bloodhounds in the Seminole War. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 223.) 

* February 26. — Remarks on his resolution as to the prohibition of small 
paper currency. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 224-225, Appendix, 218, 219, 
220.) 

* February 27. — His resolution as to prohibition of small paper currency 
adopted. A committee appointed thereunder, of which he is chairman. (G. 
26 C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 22s, Appendix, 221.) 

February 28. — Presents memorials for the protective system ; also a 
memorial for a bankrupt law ; and memorials against the use of bloodhounds 
in the Seminole War. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 226.) 

Participates in a discussion on the subject of allowing drawbacks on 
foreign coal consumed in steam vessels. (Id. 226.) 

March 2. — Presents a memorial of the United States Insurance Company 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



Ixxviii THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

and of the Insurance Company of Pennsylvania to be indemnified for prop- 
erty sequestrated by Hayti in 1811; also memorials against the use of blood- 
hounds in the Seminole War. (G. 26 C i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 228.) 

* Marcli 3.— Remarks, in reply to Mr. Davis, on the Independent Treasury 
Bill. (G. 26 C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 230, Appendix, 244-246.) 

March 4.— Votes in favor of concurring in a House amendment to the 
bill to continue the office of Commissioner of Patents. (G. 26 C i s. 1839- 

1840, VIII. 235.) .„ , 

March 6.— Presents a memorial for a duty on silk; also a memorial 
for a bankrupt law. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 243.) 

Participates in a debate on the report of the select committee on the 
resolutions as to the assumption of State debts. Offers an amendment 
declaring that the debts were contracted in the exercise of the constitutional 
power of the States, and that there was no ground for doubting the ability 
or disposition of the States to fulfil their contracts. Votes against various 
amendments, and in favor of each of the resolutions, which were agreed to. 

(Id. 244, 245.) , T J J 

* Remarks, in reply to further remarks of Mr. Davis, on the Independent 

Treasury Bill. (Id., Appendix, 335-338.) 

March 11. — Presents a memorial for the improvement of the navigation 
of the Alleghany River; also a memorial for a duty on silk; a memorial on 
banking; 'and a memorial against the use of bloodhounds in the Seminole 
War. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 259.) 

March 16. — Presents a number of memorials. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, 

VIII. 274.) 

March 17. — Presents a memorial for a bankrupt law. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839- 

1840, VIII. 277.) . , T ^ J 

* Remarks on the controversy with Mr. Davis as to the Independent 
Treasury Bill. (Id., Appendix, 295-296.) 

March 30.— Presents a memorial for a grant of lands to commissioned 
officers of the last war with Great Britain; also a memorial for a duty on 
silk; and a memorial for the mitigation of the punishment of William Lyon 
Mackenzie. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1S40, VIII. 294.) 

Participates in a debate on the bill supplementary to the act on the subject 
of Treasury notes. Votes in favor of the bill, which was passed. (Id. 295, 
Appendix, 329.) 

* March 31.— Remarks on a resolution fixing the day of adjournment on 
the 18th of May. Votes against a motion to lay the resolution on the table. 
(G. 26 C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 296-297.) 

April 2.— Votes against a substitute for the Cumberland Road Bill. Votes 
against an amendment to the bill, reducing the appropriation for each State 
to $75,000. (G. 26 C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 299, Appendix, 333.) 

April 3. — Presents a memorial for a bankrupt law. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839- 

1840, VIIL 301.) 

Submits additional documents in relation to the memorial of the Phila- 
delphia Custom-house clerks. (Id. 302.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill for the discontinuance^ of the 
office of surveyor-general and the abolition of land offices, abolishing the 
office of recorder of the General Land Office. (Id. 302.) 

Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading the bill for the con- 
tinuation of the Cumberland Road in Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. (Id. 302.) 

April 6.— Presents a memorial for a bankrupt law. (G. 26 C i s. 1839- 

1840, VIII. 306.) ^ . , , . ^ 

April 9.— Remarks on resolutions of the Maine Legislature asking Con- 

G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Priiited herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1840 Ixxix 

gress to pay for French spoliations prior to September, 1800. (Niks' Regis- 
ter, April 18, 1840, LVIII. 106; G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 310.) 

April 13. — Presents a petition of the heirs of James Van Osten. (G. 26 
C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 320.) 

* Presents a report on resolutions on the subject of the brig Enter prtse. 
(Id. 320; S. Doc. 378, 26 C. I s.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill enabling claimants to land in 
Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi to try the validity of their 
claims. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 321.) 

* April 14. — Report and remarks on the northeastern boundary dispute. 
(G. 26 C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 322, 323; S. Doc. 382, 26 C. I s.) 

April 15. — Votes against a motion laying on the table a resolution declar- 
ing that the seizure and detention of the negroes on board the brig Enterprise 
in Bermuda violated the laws of nations. Votes in favor of the resolutions, 
which were adopted. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 329.) 

April 16. — Votes against an amendment to the bill relating to pre- 
emption rights on public lands. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a 
third reading, which was ordered. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 331.) 

* April 17. — Remarks on the bill supplementary to the act establishing 
branch mints. Votes against a motion, which was lost, to recommit the bill. 
(G. 26 C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 335, Appendix, 317, 318.) 

April 21. — Asks the discharge of the Committee on Foreign Relations 
from further consideration of a memorial of J. M. Clayton and others on a 
canal across the Isthmus of Darien, which was agreed to. (G. 26 C. i s. 
1839-1840, VIII. 341.) 

Opposes a bill granting Michigan land for the construction of a canal 
around the Falls of Ste. Marie. (Id. 342.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill supplementary to the act to 
grant pre-emption rights to settlers on public lands. The bill was passed. 
(Id. 342, Appendix, 384.) 

April 23. — Votes in favor of striking out two sections of the bill for the 
reduction and graduation of the price of public lands. 

* April 24. — Presents a memorial for a duty on silk. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839- 
1840, VIII. 354.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill for the reduction and graduation 
of the price of public lands. (Id. 355.) 

April 28. — Participates in a debate on a bill respecting the judicial system 
of the United States. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 363.) 

Participates in further discussion of the bill. (Id. 363.) 

April 29. — Votes against engrossing for a third reading the bill grant- 
ing to Michigan land for constructing a canal around the Falls of Ste. Marie. 
So ordered. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 364.) 

* Remarks on a bill granting land to the Territory of Florida for the 
establishment of Dade Institute. Moves that the subject be laid on the table, 
which was agreed to. (Id. 364, Appendix, 423.) 

Remarks on the bill to amend the act amending the judicial system of 
the United States. (Id. 364.) 

May 4. — Votes in favor of the passage of the Civil and Diplomatic 
Appropriations Bill. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. ^77.) 

'* Remarks on a resolution for examining the claim of Clarke and Force 
for compiling and publishing two volumes of the Documentary History of 
the Revolution. (Id. 378.) 

* May 7. — Remarks on a report of the Secretary of the Treasury on 
public expenditures. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 382, Appendix, 441-442.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress. — s.==session. — *=Printed herein. 



Ixxx THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

Votes in favor of a motion to print 30,000 copies of the report. (Id. 382.) 

May II. — Participates in a discussion on the bill for the relief of 
Hannah Leighton. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 387.) 

May 14. — Presents a memorial relating to the conflict of decisions on the 
revenue law as to imported iron. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 393.) 

May 15. — Presents a number of memorials on various subjects. (G. 26 
C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 398.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill to create an additional land 
office in Michigan. (Id. 398.) 

May 27. — Votes in favor of the passage of a bill for the benefit of the 
Howard Institute, of Washington. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 423.) 

Presents a memorial for the suppression of the African slave trade 
under the American flag ; also a memorial for the repair of wharfs and piers 
at Port Penn. (Id. 421.) 

May 28. — Opposes the bill authorizing the States to tax any lands within 
their limits sold by the United States. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839^-1840, VIII. 426.) 

Votes in favor of an amendment to the General Bankrupt Law, removing 
all restrictions and making it general in its application. Remarks on the 
provision relating to preferences in the distribution of assets. (Id. 426.) 

May 29. — Reports a bill to carry into effect a convention between the 
United States and Mexico. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 428.) 

* Reports and speaks upon a resolution for the sale of certain presents 
from the Emperor of Morocco and Imaiun of Muscat to the President. (Id. 
428; Niles' Register, June 6, 1840, LVIII. 218.) 

Jtine I. — Presents a memorial for a dutv on foreign silk. (G. 26 C. i s 
1839-1840, VIII. 430.) 

Moves that the Senate take up and consider the bill to carry into effect 
the treaty between the United States and Mexico. (Id. 431.) 

June 2. — Votes against an amendment to the General Bankrupt Bill, to 
strike out all relating to banks and corporations. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, 

VIII. 433.) 

* June 3. — Reports adversely the bill to refund office rent advanced by 
A. H. Everett while minister to Spain. (S. Doc. 511, 26 C. i s. ; G. 26 C. i s. 
1839-1840, VIII. 439) 

June 5. — Reports a bill for relief of Auguste Davezac, William P. Jones, 
and Nathaniel Niles. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 444.) 

Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading a bill for the relief of 
the representatives of Philip Barbour. (Id. 444-) 

Votes against an amendment to the General Bankrupt Bill, providing 
for compulsory bankruptcy. (Id. 444.) 

♦Remarks on a motion to postpone the subject indefinitely. (Id. 445, 
446.) 

Votes against the motion, which was lost. (Id. 446.) 

* June II. — Remarks on a bill giving officers of the Marine Corps in 
command of the different stations double rations. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, 
VIII. 457-458.) Votes against a motion to recommit the bill to the Com- 
mittee on Naval Affairs, with instructions. Votes in favor of ordering the 
bill to be engrossed for a third reading. (Id. 458.) 

June 15. — Votes on various amendments to the bill to continue the cor- 
porate existence of banks in the District of Columbia. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839^ 
1840, VIII. 465, 466.) 

Offers an amendment for extension of the charters till July, 1842, " for 
the purpose of winding up tlieir affairs." (Id. 466.) 

* Remarks on the amendment, which was lost. (Id. 466-467.) 
Votes in favor of engrossing the liill for a third reading. (Id. 467.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1840 Ixxxi 

Votes in favor of a resolution discharging the Committee on the ^lilitia 
from further consideration of the report of the Secretary of War on the 
militia. (Id. 467.) 

June 16. — Votes aye on the passage of the bill to continue the corporate 
existence of banks in the District of Columbia. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, 
VIII. 468.) Votes against an amendment to the title of the bill. Amend- 
ment was rejected. (Id. 468.) 

Votes in favor of an amendment to print the report of the Secretary of 
War on the militia, adding the laws of 1792 and 1803 on the same subject. 
(Id. 468.) 

June 22. — Participates in a debate on the bill giving the assent of 
Congress to acts of Virginia incorporating the Falmouth and Alexandria 
Railroad CompanJ^ Votes in favor of a motion to strike out an appropria- 
tion of $300,000. Motion lost. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 476.) 

June 23. — Participates in a debate on the joint resolution for the relief 
of Langtree and O'Sullivan. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 478.) 

Votes on various amendments to the General Bankrupt Bill. Votes in 
favor of laying the bill on the table, for the purpose of having it printed, 
which was agreed to. (Id. 478-479.) 

June 24. — Participates in a debate on a bill to discharge liens and incum- 
brances on real estate owned by the United States. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839- 
1840, VIII. 482.) 

Moves the consideration of a bill for the relief of Auguste Davezac, 
William D. Jones, and Nathaniel Niles, which was agreed to. (Id. 482.) 

Votes against a motion to reconsider the vote by which March 4th was 
fixed as the day when the General Bankrupt Bill should go into operation. 
Votes against fixing March 4th as the day when the bill should go into opera- 
tion. Votes in favor of a motion to fix February ist next as the day, which 
was agreed to. Votes against a motion to strike out the provision limiting 
the operation of the bill to two years. Motion lost. Votes against ordering 
the bill to be engrossed for a third reading. (Id. 482, 483.) 

June 25. — Moves the discharge of the Committee on Foreign Relations 
from the consideration of a request for the recall of Consul Trist from 
Havana, and its reference to the Committee on Commerce, which was agreed 
to. (G. 26 C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 484-) 

* June 26. — Remarks in favor of printing extra copies of the report of the 
Secretary of the Treasury. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 487, 488.) 

June 29. — Remarks on the bill to regulate the pay of the officers of the 
line and stafif of the Army. (G. 26 C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 491.) 

Moves reference of President Van Buren's message on the northeastern 
boundary dispute to the Committee on Foreign Relations, which was agreed 
to. (Id. 492.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to postpone indefinitely the bill to aid the 
Mount Carmel and New Albany Railroad Company in the construction of 
a certain railroad. Motion agreed to. (Id. 492.) 

July I. — Remarks on a resolution calling for a copy of the British 
report of the survey and map relating to the northeastern boundary. (G. 26 
C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. 496.) 

Remarks on a resolution fixing the day for the adjournment of Congress. 
(Id. 496.) 

* July 3. — Remarks on a resolution calling for a copy of the British 
report of the survey and map relating to the northeastern boundary. (G. 26 
C. I s. 1839-1840, VIII. S03.) 

July 6. — Votes on various amendments to the bill relating to the collec- 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 

vi 



Ixxxii THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

tion of duties on imports. Votes in favor of an amendment providing that 
the bill should cease to have effect after June 30, 1842. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839- 

1840, VIII. 510.) 

July 7. — Participates in a discussion on a bill to amend the act regulating 

the pay of the Navy. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 512.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill relating to the collection of duties 

on imports. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading, which 

was ordered. (Id. 512.) 

July 8.— Presents a petition for the abolition of slavery. (G. 26 C. i s. 

1839-1840, VIII. 5I4-) 

July g.— Votes on several amendments to a bill to publish the laws, 
treaties, and other documents of the United States, under the Attorney- 
General's direction. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 515.) 

Participates in a debate on a motion to reduce the compensation and 
expenses of the Attorney-General from $3,000 to $2,000. Votes against the 
motion, which was rejected. Votes against engrossing the bill for a third 
reading. Bill rejected. (Id. 516.) 

July 10. — Votes against a motion to postpone indefinitely the bill to estab- 
lish a uniform rule of computing the mileage of members of Congress. Votes 
and speaks on various amendments to the bill. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, 

VIII. 518, 519.) 

Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third readmg, which was 
ordered. (Id. 519.) 

July II. — Votes in favor of an amendment to the bill making appropria- 
tions for the naval service for 1840, adding an appropriation of $95,000 for a 
dry-dock at Pensacola. Amendment adopted. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, 

VIII. 522.) 

* Remarks on a motion to strike out an appropriation for dry-docks at 
New York and Pensacola. Votes in favor of the motion, which was agreed 

to. (Id. 522.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill to establish a uniform rule of 
computing the mileage of members of Congress. Bill passed. (Id. 522.) 

jiil^, 13.— Remarks on a bill granting pensions to Cherokee warriors 
engaged in the War of 1812. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 524) 

July i5._Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading the bill to 
extend the corporate existence of banks in the District of Columbia. Bill 
rejected. Remarks on a motion to reconsider the vote; moves postponement 
of the subject till next day, which was agreed to. (G. 26 C. i s. 1S39-1840. 

VIII. 527.) ^ . „ , . 

July 16.— Moves the discharge of the Committee on Foreign Relations 
from subjects referred to it and not acted upon, which was agreed to. (G. 
26 C. I s. 1839^1840, VIII. 529.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to postpone till the next session a resolution 
to print the report on the mineral region of Iowa and Wisconsin. Votes 
against an amendment that the work should be done under the direction of 
the Secretary of the Senate. Votes in favor of laying the resolution on the 
table. (Id. 530.) 

* Remarks on the bill to continue the corporate existence of banks in the 
District of Columbia. Votes in favor of the motion to reconsider the vote 
rejecting the bill. Motion lost. (Id. 530. Appendix, 735-738.) 

July 17. — Votes against engrossing for a third reading a resolution pro- 
viding for the exchange of extra books in the Library of Congress, and of 
public documents, for those of foreign countries. The question was decided 
in the affirmative. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 534-) 

G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1840 Ixxxiii 

Votes in favor of a motion to take up a bill to alter and continue the 
charter of the city of Washington. Votes against a motion to lay the bill 
on the table. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading, 
which was ordered. (Id. 534.) 

Takes part in a debate on an appropriation of $12,000 for the purchase 
of an island in the Mississippi, near Fort Snelling. (Id. 535.) 

* Remarks on an amendment to the Army Appropriations Bill author- 
izing the President, in case the means of the Treasury should be insufficient to 
meet appropriations, to postpone certain expenditures. (Id. 535, 536.) 

Moves an appropriation of $6,000 for an outfit for the minister at Con- 
stantinople ; remarks on the amendment, which was agreed to. Votes in 
favor of an amendment appropriating $6,000 for public works on the Hudson 
River. Participates in the debate on an amendment appropriating $12,000 
for the purchase of an island at the confluence of the St. Peter's and 
Mississippi rivers. (Id. 536.) 

July 18. — Votes in favor of a substitute for the resolution extending the 
charter of the banks of the District of Columbia for one year. Substitute 
rejected. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 539.) 

July 20. — Votes for a motion to recommit the joint resolution to con- 
tinue the existence of the banks in the District of Columbia till March 
4, 1841, with instructions to substitute the bill lately rejected by the Senate. 
Motion lost. Votes in favor of a motion to recommit the resolution, with 
instructions to make stockholders subject to the banks' liabilities to the 
amount of their stock. Motion lost. Remarks on the resolution. Proposes 
an amendment declaring the banks not relieved from the provisions of the 
act of July 3, 1840; amendment objected to, and not considered. Votes 
against the resolution, which was passed. Offers a substitute for the title, 
declaring the resolution to be supplementary to the act of July 3, 1840; 
substitute adopted. (G. 26 C. i s. 1839-1840, VIII. 542.) 

Remarks on a motion to recede from the amendments to the Army 
Appropriations Bill. Votes against the motion. (Id. 543.) 

December 7. — Appears as a Senator from Pennsylvania. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 
1840-1841, IX. I.) 

December 9. — Appears in his place as a Senator from Pennsylvania, a 
quorum of the Senate being present. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. i.) 

December 10. — Moves the election of a chairman of the Committee on 
Commerce, which was agreed to. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. i.) 

On announcement of the standing committees, appears as chairman of 
the Committee on Foreign Relations, and as a member of the Committee on 
Manufactures. (Id. 12; S. Doc. 3, 26 C. 2 s.) 

December 14. — Moves reference to the Committee on Foreign Relations 
of that part of the President's message relating to foreign affairs, which 
was agreed to. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 14.) 

December 15. — Presents a memorial of William W. Chew, secretary of 
legation at St. Petersburg. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 18.) 

December 21. — Moves reference to the Committee on Foreign Relations 
of the resolution calling for information relative to the northeastern bound- 
ary, which was agreed to. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 40.) 

December 22. — Presents a letter praying for extension of time for the 
payment of debts of the Agricultural Bank of Natchez to the government; 
also a copy of the proceedings of a meeting in Philadelphia concerning claims 
for French spoliations prior to 1800. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 44.) 

December 23. — Remarks on a bill establishing the pay of pursers in the 
Navy. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 49.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



Ixxxiv THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

* Remarks on a bill granting a pension to Hannah Leighton. Votes in 
favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading, which was ordered. (Id. 51.) 

December 24. — Votes against a motion to lay on the table Benton's 
motion for leave to bring in a bill to put a tax on paper currency, and to print 
the bill. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 58.) 

* December 28. — Remarks as to the committee to which should be 
referred a memorial on commercial reciprocity between the United States and 
certain British colonies. Moves reference to Committee on Commerce, which 
was agreed to. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 59, 60.) 

December 30. — Presents a petition of John Landis for the purchase of 
certain pictures. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 65.) 

December 31. — Presents a petition of Stephen Simpson. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 
1840-1841, IX. 71.) 

SENATE (Continued), 1841. 

* January 4, 1841. — Votes in favor of an amendment to the bill to estab- 
lish a permanent prospective pre-emption system for settlers on public lands, 
by confining the benefits of the bill to white settlers; amendment adopted. 
Remarks on an amendment excepting aliens from the provisions of the bill. 
Votes against the amendment, which was rejected. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, 
IX. 78, Appendix, 22, 23-24.) 

January 5. — Presents memorials for the abolition of the spirit portion of 
the Navy ration. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 81.) 

* Remarks on an amendment to the Pre-emption Bill. (Id., Appendix, 
23-24, 24-25, 26, 27.) 

January 6. — Presents memorials for the abolition of the spirit portion of 
the Navy ration. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 85.) 

Votes in favor of an amendment to the Pre-emption Bill, excepting 
therefrom any person who, owning lands in any State or Territory, should 
quit or abandon his residence on his own land to reside on public land in 
the same State or Territory. Amendment adopted. (Id., Appendix, 28.) 

January 7. — Remarks on a bill for the relief of the legal representatives 
of John J. Bulow, Jr. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 87, 88.) 

* January 8. — Remarks on a resolution to inquire into the expediency of 
obtaining copies of certain British Parliamentary debates and of British land 
titles concerning the northeastern boundary. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 
91-92.) 

January 11. — Presents petitions. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 94.) 
January 16. — Presents a memorial for a General Bankrupt Law. (G. 26 
C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 104.) 

* January 18. — Remarks on the report of the Secretary of the Navy in 
relation to the use of American water-rotted hemp in the Navy. (G. 26 C. 
2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 107.) 

January ig. — Votes against an amendment to a motion to recommit the 
bill for pre-emptions to settlers on public lands. Votes against a motion 
to recommit the bill with instructions. Votes against a substitute bill. (G. 
26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 112.) 

January 20. — Votes in favor of the passage of a bill making temporary 
provision for lunatics in the District of Columbia. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, 

IX. 114.) 

* Speaks and votes against an amendment to the bill for pre-emptions 
to settlers on public lands. Votes against a motion to adjourn. Speaks and 
votes against an amendment limiting the bill's operation to two years. 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1841 Ixxxv 

Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading, which was ordered. 
(Id. 114, Appendix, 196, 197, 199-200, 201.) 

January 21. — Votes against a motion to postpone the bill for pre- 
emptions to settlers on public lands. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 116.) 

* January 22. — Speech defending Van Buren's administration against the 
charge of extravagance in expenditures. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 117, 
Appendix, 106-111.) 

January 25. — Presents a petition for reimbursement of duty paid on 
hosiery. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 124.) 

January 26. — Presents a memorial of D. W. Prescott for refund of duty 
on goods destroyed by fire. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 126.) 

January 29. — Remarks during the debate on the bill to establish a 
permanent prospective pre-emption system for settlers on public lands. (G. 
26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 132.) 

February i. — Presents a memorial for the completion of the construction 
of Erie Harbor. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 135.) 

Presents a memorial for a duty on silk. (Id. 135.) 

Moves to lay on the table a motion to discharge the Committee on 
Commerce from further consideration of the memorial for the erection of a 
new custom-house at Philadelphia. Motion to table agreed to. (Id. 135.) 

Votes against an amendment to the Pre-emption Bill. (Id., Appen- 
dix, 104.) 

February 2. — Votes against a substitute for the Pre-emption Bill, to 
cede the lands to the States within which they may lie. The substitute was 
rejected. Votes in favor of Crittenden's motion to recommit the bill, with 
instruction to amend it so as to distribute the proceeds of the sales of public 
lands to the several States. The motion was lost. Votes in favor of the 
passage of the bill, which was passed. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 138.) 

Remarks on postponing the consideration of the General Bankrupt Bill. 
(Id. 138.) 

February 3. — Presents a memorial for a duty on saddlery and harness. 
(G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 139.) 

Participates in a debate on a motion to print 2,500 copies of the report 
of Mr. Plitt on post office administration in Europe. (Id. 140.) 

February 4. — Remarks on the General Bankrupt Bill. Votes in favor of 
Benton's amendment, requiring the assent of a majority of creditors to grant- 
ing the discharge of a bankrupt. Amendment rejected. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 
1840-1841, IX. 144.) 

February 5. — Takes a part in the discussion on a resolution for the 
transfer to Maryland of Chesapeake and Ohio Canal stock held by the United 
States. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 147.) 

February 8. — Presents a memorial against the passage of the General 
Bankrupt Bill. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 152.) 

Votes against a motion to take up the bill to continue the corporate 
existence of banks in the District of Columbia. Motion lost. (Id. 153.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to recommit the Bankrupt Bill. Remarks on 
the bill. (Id. I53-) 

February 11. — Presents a memorial for a mail route in Lancaster County, 
Pennsylvania. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841. IX. 160.) 

February 12. — Moves reference of the case of Samuel R. Slaymaker to the 
Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads, which was agreed to. (G. 26 
C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 165.) 

Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading the bill to authorize th»' 



G.=Congressional Globe. — C.=Congress. — .s.=session. — *=Printed herein. 



Ixxxvi THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

issue of Treasury notes. So ordered. Votes in favor of the bill, which 
was passed. (Id. 165.) 

February 15. — Presents a memorial for strengthening the defences. (G. 
26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 175.) 

Takes part in the debate on the bill for payment of Revolutionary and 
other pensioners. (Id. 176.) 

February 17. — Moves to take up in Committee of the Whole the bill for 
the relief of Samuel R. Slaymaker, which was agreed to. Remarks on the 
bill. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 181.) 

February 19. — Presents memorials for a duty on silk. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 
1840-1841, IX. 188.) 

* Remarks on a resolution to elect a public printer. (Id. 194-195.) 
Votes against a motion to postpone, which was lost. (Id. 195.) 

Votes in favor of Clay's motion to take up his resolution for the repeal 
of the Independent Treasury Bill. Motion agreed to. (Id. 195.) 

February 20. — Votes in favor of a motion to lay on the table the resolu- 
tion for the election of a public printer. Motion prevailed. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 
1840-1841, IX. 198.) 

Remarks on a motion to take up bills connected with the Territories. 

(Id. 198.) 

February 22. — Participates in the debate on a request of Crittenden 
for leave to introduce a bill to prevent interference of Federal officers in 
elections. Votes against granting leave. Question decided in the negative. 
(G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 199.) 

February 23. — Moves reference of documents in the case of C. F. Sibbald, 
which was agreed to. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 202.) 

Introduces a bill to amend the judiciary acts. (Id. 202.) 

February 27. — Reports a bill for relief of the administrator of William 
A. Slacum. (G. 25 C. 2 s. 1840-1841. IX. 212.) 

Remarks on the report of the Judiciary Committee on his bill to amend 
the judiciary acts. (Id. 213.) 

* Remarks on the bill to reorganize the judicial circuits of the United 
States. (Id. 215.) Votes in favor of an amendment fixing the circuits and 
terms. (Id. 216.) 

March i.— Remarks on his motion to discharge the Committee on Foreign 
Relations from consideration of the resolution calling for correspondence 
relating to the northeastern boundary. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 217-218.) 

* Remarks on an amendment to the Civil and Diplomatic Appropriations 

Bill. (Id. 220.) 

Remarks on Mr. Webster's statement, when tendering his resignation, as 
to his views on slavery. (Id., Appendix, 332.) 

March 2. — Votes in favor of an amendment to the Civil and Diplomatic 
Appropriations Bill, fixing the remuneration of certain officers. (G. 26 C. 
2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 222, 223.) 

Remarks on an amendment to the Naval Appropriation Bill for lifeboats 
at Rockaway, N. Y., and Long Branch, N. J. (Id. 223.) 

March 3.— Presents a memorial for the incorporation of certain pro- 
visions in the General Bankrupt Bill. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 226.) 

March 5.— Votes against a motion to take up for consideration the 
resolution for the dismissal of Blair and Rives as public printers. Motion 
agreed to. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 238.) 

* March 8.— Remarks on the resolution for the dismissal of Blair and 
Rives as public printers. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 238-240, 241-242.) 

* Remarks on a resolution to proceed to the election of a sergeant-at- 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1841 Ixxxvii 

arms. (Id., Appendix, 317.) Votes in favor of a motion to postpone, which 
was lost. Votes against the resolution, which was adopted. (Id., Appendix, 

319-) 

March Q. — Votes in favor of Benton's amendment to the resolution for 

the dismissal of Blair and Rives as public printers, declaring that it was not 
competent for the Senate to annul their election under the joint resolution of 
the previous session. Amendment rejected. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 

246.) 

March 11. — Votes against the resolution to dismiss Blair and Rives as 
public printers. Resolution adopted. (G. 26 C. 2 s. 1840-1841, IX. 256.) 

June I. — Appears as a Senator from Pennsylvania. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, 

X. 4.) . . , 

Votes against an amendment to a joint resolution for a committee of the 
two Houses to wait on the President and inform him of the presence of a 
quorum, by substituting " Vice-President " instead of " President." Amend- 
ment rejected. (Id. 5.) 

* Remarks on a motion for printing the President's message. (Id. 8.) 
June 2. — Receives 14 out of 43 votes on a ballot for chairman of the 

Committee on Foreign Relations, Mr. Rives receiving 28 ; receives i out of 45 
votes for chairman of the Committee on Finance, Mr. Clay, of Kentucky, 
receiving 23; receives i vote for chairman of the Committee on Manu- 
factures, Mr. Evans receiving 25 out of 34 cast. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 11.) 

/jj„^ 3. — On the list of standing committees of the Senate, appears 
as a member of the Committee on Foreign Relations and of the Committee 
on Manufactures. (G. 27 C. 1 s. 1841, X. 12; S. Doc. 11, 27 C. i s.) 

Remarks on a motion to refer to the Committee on Foreign Relations 
the part of the President's message relating to foreign affairs. (Id. 14.) 

Votes in favor of an amendment to a resolution to inquire into the 
expediency of repealing the act for the collection and disbursement of the 
public revenues. (Id. 14.) 

* June 7. — Remarks on a resolution calling upon the Secretary of the 
Treasury to present a plan for a National Bank or fiscal agent. (G. 27 C. 

I s. 1841, X. 23.) 

June 8.— Presents a memorial of E. Littell, presenting a plan for a fiscal 
agent for the Government. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 29.) 

Votes on various amendments to the bill for the repeal of the Independent 
Treasury Act. (Id. 32, 33, 34.) Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a 
third reading, which was ordered. (Id. 34.) 

* June 9. — Presents a memorial for the abolition of slavery in the 
District of Columbia and the Territories. Remarks on the question of its 
reception. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 35.) 

Remarks on a motion to refer to the Committee on Foreign Relations 
the part of the President's message relating to foreign affairs. (Id. 36.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to adjourn, made during the discussion of the 
bill to repeal the Independent Treasury Act. Motion lost. (Id., Appen- 
dix, 30.) 

June 10. — Presents a memorial for a duty on silk. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, 

X. 38.) . , . 

* Remarks on a motion to refer to the Committee on Foreign Relations 

the part of the President's message relating to the McLeod case. (Id. 39, 
Appendix, 14-18.) 

June II.— Presents a memorial for fortifying the Delaware River. (G. 27 

C. I s. 1841, X. 42.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



Ixxxviii THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

June 12. — Asks and obtains leave to withdraw the petition of Margaret 
Shaw. (G. 27 C. I s. 1841, X. 44.) 

* Remarks on a resolution as to unfinished business. (Id. 45.) Votes in 
favor of a motion to lay the resolution on the table. Motion lost. (Id. 47.) 
Remark to Mr. Clay. (Id. 48.) 

June 14. — Votes against a motion to lay on the table a resolution calling 
for information concerning the disbursement of sums of money for the 
emigration and subsistence of the Indians. Motion carried. (G. 27 C. i s. 
1841, X. so.) 

Remarks on the motion to refer to the Committee on Foreign Relations 
the part of the President's message relating to the McLeod case. (Id. 51.) 

'^ June 15. — Speech on the motion to refer to the Committee on Foreign 
Relations the part of the President's message relating to the McLeod case. 
(G. 27 C. I s. 1841, X. 52, Appendix, 65-69.) 

June 16. — Moves reference of the memorial for the defence of the Dela- 
ware, which was agreed to. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 56.) 

* June 17. — Submits a resolution on removals from office. (G. 27 C. i s. 
1841, X. 63-64; S. Doc. 25, 27 C. I s.) 

June 18. — Votes in favor of a motion to lay on the table a communica- 
tion from the Governor of Maryland on the subject of the Chesapeake and 
Ohio Canal. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 70.) 

Moves that the Senate adjourn till the Monday following; remarks; 
motion prevails. (Id. 70.) 

* June 21. — Remarks on a motion to print the report of the Secretary 
of the Treasury on the state of the finances. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 83.) 

June 22. — Votes against Clay's motion to lay on the table a motion to 
print the proceedings of a meeting in Cincinnati remonstrating against the 
creation of a National Bank. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 86.) 

Proposes to modify Clay's resolution for changing the hour of meeting 
of the Senate to 10 o'clock, by fixing the time at 11 o'clock; which was 
negatived. (Id. 86.) 

Remarks on his resolution relating to removals from office. (Id. 83.) 

Votes in favor of Benton's amendment to the bill to extend the charters 
of the banks in the District of Columbia, by prohibiting the banks from issuing 
paper currency of a denomination less than $20. Amendment adopted. (Id. 

87.) 

June 23. — Remarks on his resolution relating to removals from office. 

(G. 27 C. I s. 1841, X. 94.) 

* Remarks on a motion to recommit the bill to extend the charters of the 
banks of the District of Columbia. Votes in favor of the motion, which 
prevailed. (Id. 97.) 

* June 24. — Remarks on his resolution relating to removals from office. 
(G. 27 C. I s. 1841, X. 101-102.) 

Remarks on a motion to postpone till the following day the bill to 
incorporate the subscribers to the Fiscal Bank of the United States. Votes 
in favor of the motion, which prevailed. (Id. 104.) 

Votes against a motion to recommit a bill appropriating $25,000 for the 
relief of the widow of General William Henry Harrison. (Id. no.) 

June 25.— Votes aye on the passage of the bill appropriating $25,000 for 
the relief of the widow of General William Henry Harrison. (G. 27 C. i s. 

1841, X. 121.) 

Remarks on the bill to incorporate the subscribers to the Fiscal Bank of 

the United States. (Id. 121.) 

June 29. — Opposes and votes against various amendments to the bill to 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1841 Ixxxix 

incorporate the subscribers of the Fiscal Bank of the United States. (G. 27 
C. I s. 1841, X. 124-125.) 

* June 30. — Remarks on a petition for a National Bank. (G. 27 C. i s. 
1841, X. 129.) 

Votes on various amendments to the Fiscal Bank Bill. (Id. 129-130.) 

July 3. — Presents a petition for an appropriation for a light-house at 
the Delaware breakwater. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 144.) 

July 6. — Votes against amendments to the Fiscal Bank Bill. Moves 
adjournment, which was agreed to. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 152.) 

July 7. — Presents a memorial for a Bankrupt Law. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, 
X. 157- ) 

* Speech on the bill to incorporate the subscribers of the Fiscal Bank 
of the United States. (Id. 157-158, Appendix, 161-169.) Votes in favor of 
his motion to strike out from the first section the words " District of 
Columbia." Motion rejected. (Id. 159.) Remarks on a motion to strike 
out " District of Columbia " and insert " New Orleans." Votes in favor of 
the motion. (Id. 159.) 

July 8. — Votes in favor of various amendments to the Fiscal Bank Bill. 
(G. 27 C. I s. 1841, X. 163-164, Appendix, 122, 144.) 

July 9. — Votes in favor of various amendments to the Fiscal Bank Bill. 
(G. 27 C. I s. 1841, X. 172, 173.) 

July 10. — Votes in favor of an amendment to the Fiscal Bank Bill. (G. 
27 C. I s. 1841, X. 178.) 

* July 12. — Remarks on the bill to incorporate the subscribers of the 
Fiscal Bank of the United States. (G. 27 C. 1 s. 1841, X. 186-187.) Votes in 
favor of various amendments. (Id. 187.) 

* July 13. — Remarks on an amendment to the Fiscal Bank Bill. (G. 27 
C. I s. 1841, X. 192.) Votes in favor of the amendment. (Id. 193.) 

* July 14. — Remarks on an amendment to the Fiscal Bank Bill, providing 
that nothing in the act should be considered an admission that Congress has 
not the power to alter, modify, or repeal the charter. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, 
X. 197.) Votes on various amendments. (Id. 198, 199, 200.) 

July 16. — Remarks on a motion to strike from an amendment to the bill 
authorizing a loan of twelve million dollars the clause prohibiting the 
redemption of Treasury notes not due. Votes against the motion. Votes 
in favor of the original amendment. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 211.) 

July 17. — Votes in favor of various amendments to the Loan Bill. Votes 
in favor of a motion to adjourn. Remarks on a renewal of the motion 
prohibiting the reissue of Treasury notes to be redeemed in the future ; votes 
in favor of the amendment in a modified form. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 221, 
222, 223.) 

July 19. — Remarks on his resolution relating to removals from office. 
(G. 27 C. I s. 1841, X. 226.) 

Votes against the passage of the bill authorizing a loan of twelve million 
dollars. (Id. 226.) 

July 20. — Votes in favor of an amendment to the Fiscal Bank Bill. 

♦Remarks on the bill. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841. X. 231.) 

July 21. — Remarks on a bill for changing the place of trial of General 
Gratiot from Missouri to the District of Columbia. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, 

X. 233.) 

Votes on various amendments to the Fiscal Bank Bill. Offers an amend- 
ment, which was rejected, that the Bank should not discount when the notes 
in circulation and private deposits exceeded three times the specie in the 
vaults. Offers another amendment, making the proportion one to four, 



G.=Congressional Globe. — C.=Congress. — s.=session. — *=Printed herein. 



xc THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

which was also rejected. Remarks on these amendments. Votes on various 
amendments. (Id. 234, 235, 236, 2Z'7-^ 

July 22. — Votes against engrossing for a third reading the bill for 
changing the venue, in the case of the United States v. Gratiot, from Missouri 
to the District of Columbia. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 240.) 

July 23. — Votes against a motion to take up the Bankrupt Bill. Votes 
on amendments. Votes against engrossing the bill for a third reading, which 
was ordered. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 243, 244.) 

* July 24. — Speech on the Bankrupt Bill. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 245, 
Appendix, 205-207.) Votes against the bill, which was passed. (Id. 246.) 

Votes on concurring in several committee amendments to the Fiscal 
Bank Bill. (Id. 246.) 

* July 26. — Votes on various amendments to the Fiscal Bank Bill. Votes 
against a motion to adjourn. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 249, 250, 251, 252.) 

July 27. — Presents a memorial. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 253.) 
Votes in favor of a motion to postpone indefinitely the Fiscal Bank Bill. 
(Id., Appendix, 202.) 

* Remarks on an amendment to the Fiscal Bank Bill, providing for the 
establishment of branches in any State or Territory, with the consent of such 
State, not to be removed without the assent of Congress. Votes against the 
amendment. Votes against engrossing the bill for a third reading, which 
was ordered. (Id. 255-256, Appendix, 213.) 

* July 28. — Remarks on a bill to carry into effect the treaty with Mexico. 
CG. 27 C. I s. 1841, X. 258.) 

Votes in favor of the indefinite postponement of the Fiscal Bank Bill. 
Votes against the bill, which was passed. (Id. 260.) 

July 29. — Remarks on a bill providing for navy pensions. Votes in 
favor of an amendment restricting payments under it to those persons entitled 
under the laws in existence before 1837. Votes against a motion to strike 
out the section relating to pensions of officers on retired pay or in service with 
full pay. Further remarks. (G. 27 C. I s. 1841, X. 262, 263.) 

July 30. — Presents a memorial for a Bankrupt Law. (G. 27 C. I s. 1841, 
X. 268.) 

Votes against several amendments to the bill to incorporate certain banks 
in the District of Columbia. Votes against engrossing the bill for a third 
reading. (Id. 269, 270.) 

August 2. — Presents a petition against the Bankrupt Bill. (G. 27 C. i s. 
1841, X. 275.) 

Remarks on an amendment to the Naval Appropriations Bill. (Id. 280.) 

August 3. — Votes against laying on the table a resolution to hold execu- 
tive sessions with open doors, when treaties were not under consideration. 
(G. 27 C. I s. 1841, X. 284.) 

Remarks on an amendment to the bill for the erection of fortifications 
and the suppression of Indian hostilities. Votes for the amendment. (Id. 
285.) Votes against several other amendments, and participates in debates on 
them. (Id. 288.) 

August 4. — Presents a memorial for a duty on soda ash and pipe-clay 
used in glass manufacture. (G 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 291.) 

Remarks on the question of concurring in an amendment to the Forti- 
fications Bill. Votes on various other amendments. Votes against a motion 
to reconsider the vote for an amendment on armed steamers. (Id. 292, 
293, 294.) 

August 5. — Makes remarks on and votes against laying on the table a 



G.=Congressional Globe. — C.=Coiigress. — s.=sessioii. — *= Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1841 xci 

motion to print a memorial remonstrating against the acts of the extra ses- 
sion. (G. 27 C. I s. 1841, X. 296-297.) 

Votes against the third reading of the bill to continue the charters of the 
banks in the District of Columbia. (Id. 297.) 

Votes aye on the passage of the Fortifications Bill. (Id. 297.) 

Takes part in the debate on an amendment to the Navy Pension Bill. 
Votes in favor of another amendment. (Id. 298.) 

August 6.— Offers an amendment to the Navy Pension Bill to limit its 
operation until the close of the next Congress. Amendment adopted. 
(G. 27 C. I s. 1841, X. 302.) 

August 7. — Presents memorials relating to duties on woollens and bleach- 
ing-powders. Remarks on the latter subject. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 304.) 

Votes against sustaining a decision of the Chair ruling Benton out oi 
order. Decision not sustained. Remarks on the appeal. (Id. 304, Appendix, 

192, I93-) , . , . , 

* August 9. — Remarks on a resolution relatmg to the appomtment ot 

additional clerks in the Land Office. (G. 27 C. 1 s. 1841, X. 306, 307, 308-309.) 

Votes against a motion to lay the subject on the table. (Id. 3<p9-)_ 

Remarks against an amendment to the bill for the distribution of the 
proceeds of the sales of public lands. (Id. 311.) 

August 10. — Votes in favor of a motion to print the memorial remon- 
strating against the acts of the extra session. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 313.) 

Votes in favor of a number of amendments to the bill for the distribu- 
tion of the proceeds of the sales of public lands and to grant pre-emptions. 
(Id. 316, 317.) 

August II. — Presents a memorial in favor of defences on the northern 
frontier. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 319.) 

Votes against a motion to lay on the table the bill for the distribution 
of the proceeds of the sales of public lands. (Id. 320.) 

Votes against a motion to take up the report of the Finance Committee 
on the House amendments to the bill repealing the Sub-Treasury Act. (Id. 
320.) Votes against a motion to postpone the bill. Votes against several 
House amendments. (Id. 321.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill for the distribution of the 
proceeds of the sales of public lands and to grant pre-emptions. 

August 12. — Presents a memorial on a duty on silk. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, 

X. 324.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill for the distribution of the pro- 
ceeds of the sales of public lands. 

* Remarks on an amendment to strike out the ten per cent, given to 
the new States. Votes in favor of the amendment. (Id. 328, 328-329, 330, 
Appendix, 231.) 

August 13. — Votes against several amendments to the bill for the distri- 
bution of the proceeds of the sales of public lands. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 333-) 

* August 16. — Remarks on the disturbance in the Senate gallery during 
the reading of President Tyler's veto of the Bank Bill. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, 

X. 338.) 

August 17. — Votes in favor of a motion to lay the Bank Bill on the 
table. Motion lost. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 341.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill for the distribution of the pro- 
ceeds of the sales of public lands. Remarks on an amendment giving the 
Territories ten per cent, of the proceeds. (Id. 341.) 

Votes against a motion to postpone the consideration of the veto on the 
Bank Bill till the following day. (Id. 342.) 



G.=Congressional Globe. — C.=Congress. — s.=session. — *=Printed herein. 



xcii THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

August i8.— Votes against a motion to postpone till the following day 
the consideration of the veto of the Bank Bill. Motion prevailed. Votes 
against an amendment to the bill for the distril)Ution of the proceeds of 
the sales of public lands. Votes against a motion to lay the bill on the 
table, which was agreed to. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 348.) 

* Remarks on an amendment to the Bankrupt Bill. (Id. 348.) Votes 
in favor of a motion, which was lost, to postpone the bill. (Id. 349.) 

August 19.— Votes against the passage of the Fiscal Bank Bill. The 
bill was rejected, owing to the lack of a two-thirds vote. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, 

X 3=i2 ) 

August 20.— Presents a memorial against the Bankrupt Bill. (G. 27 C. 1 s. 

1841, X. 354-) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill for the distribution of the pro- 
ceeds of the sales of public lands. Offers a motion to adjourn, which was 
rejected. Votes in favor of a substitute bill. (Id. 359, 360.) 

August 21.— Remarks on amendments to the bill for the distribution of 
the proceeds of the sales of public lands. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 364.) 

August 23. — Presents a memorial for a duty on chloride of lime and 
bleaching-powders. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 369.) 

Participates in the discussion on a resolution for the purchase of water- 
rotted hemp for the use of the Navy. (Id. 369.) 

Votes against laying on the table a resolution fixing the day of adjourn- 
ment. (Id. 369.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to consider executive business. (Id. 369.) 

Votes against several amendments to the bill for the distribution of the 
proceeds of the sales of public lands. Votes in favor of a motion to post- 
pone the bill. Votes against engrossing the bill for a third reading, which 
was ordered. (Id. 369, 370.) 

August 24.— Votes in favor of indefinitely postponing a new House bill 
for a Fiscal Bank. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 372.) 

* Remarks on a motion to refer the bill to a select committee. (Id. 372.) 
August 26. — Votes against Benton's motion to recommit the bill for the 

distribution of the proceeds of the sales of public lands, with instructions. 
Votes against the passage of the bill, which was passed. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, 

X. 388.) 

August 27.— Votes in favor of an amendment to the bill relating to duties 
and drawbacks. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 391.) 

'*= August 28.— Remarks on a House amendment to the Fortifications Bill. 
Votes against an amendment appropriating $50,000 for defences at Buffalo, 
New York. Remarks on a Senate amendment for a site for a Western, 
Southwestern, or Northwestern armory. Votes in favor of insisting on this 
amendment. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 396, 397, 399.) 

* Offers an amendment to the Revenue Bill, to repeal laws admitting 
railroad iron free of duty. Remarks on the amendment. (Id. 400.) 

August 30.— Remarks on a memorial for a duty on chloride of lime 
and bleaching-powders. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 402.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to take up the resolution fixing a day for 
adjournment. (Id. 402.) 

* Remarks on his amendment for a duty of 20 per cent, on railroad iron, 
and on an amendment by Huntington that iron imported prior to December i, 
1841, be exempt from duty. The latter amendment was adopted. Votes 
against a motion to reconsider the vote on this amendment. (Id. 402, 403, 
403-404, 404, 405.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1841 xciii 

Votes in favor of a motion to recede from amendments to the bill for 
the distribution of the proceeds of the sales of public lands. (Id. 405-)_ 

August 31.— Remarks on a provision in the Post Office Appropriations 
Bill making the remainder of $150,000 a contingent fund. Votes and speaks 
on various amendments. Votes against the passage of the bill. (G. 27 C. i s. 
1841, X. 408, 409, 410, 411.) 

* September i.— Presents a memorial for a duty on foreign prints and 
pictures. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 413.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of a bill for satisfaction of outstandmg 
Choctaw reservations under the treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek, of Sep- 
tember, 1830. (Id. 417.) 

* September 2. — Votes in favor of a motion to lay on the table the bill 
relating to duties and drawbacks, and to take up the bill to establish a Fiscal 
Corporation. Votes in favor of various amendments. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 
418, 419.) 

Presents a memorial for a duty on chloride of lime. (Id. 420.) 

Remarks on the bill to establish a Fiscal Corporation of the United 
States. (Id. 420-421, Appendix, 340-344, 345-346.) 

September 3. — Votes against laying on the table the proceedings of a 
meeting in Virginia, disapproving the measures of the present session of 
Congress. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 421.) 

Votes in favor of an amendment to the Fiscal Corporation Bill, declar- 
ing the power of Congress to modify or repeal it; amendment rejected. Votes 
against a third reading of the bill, which was ordered. (Id. 423.) 

Votes against concurring in a House amendment to the Fortifications 
Bill. (Id. 423.) 

Moves the passage of the bill allowing the franking privilege to the 
widow of President Harrison, which was read the third time and passed. 

(Id. 423.) 

September 4. — Votes nay on the adoption of an amendment to the Revenue 
Bill, to exempt tea and coffee from duty. Votes against a motion to adjourn, 
which prevailed. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 428.) 

September 6. — Remarks on a bill appropriating a sum of money for the 
outfits of diplomatic agents. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 429.) 

Votes for an amendment to the Tariff Bill, to exempt salt from duty 
after June 3, 1842; amendment rejected. Votes against an amendment by 
Calhoun, which was lost, to limit the operation of the act to articles paying 
a duty of less than 20 per cent. (Id. 430, 431-) 

* Offers and speaks on an amendment to repeal the laws exempting rail- 
road iron from duty. Amendment adopted. (Id. 430, 431.) 

September 7. — Takes part in a debate on the bill making an appropria- 
tion for the outfits and arrearages of diplomatic agents. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, 

X. 433.) 

Votes on various amendments to the Revenue Bill. (Id. 433, 434, 436, 

437-) 

Participates In a debate on an amendment to the Diplomatic Appropria- 
tion Bill, reducing certain allowances for outfits. Moves to reduce the amount 
of the appropriations. (Id. 437-) 

* Remarks on the Revenue Bill. Votes in favor of the bill, which was 
passed. (Id. 438.) 

September 9. — Votes in favor of a motion to take up for consideration 
the resolution fixing the day of adjournment. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 443.) 

September 10. — Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading a reso- 
lution for the employment of reporters by the Senate, which was ordered. 
(G. 27 C. I s. 1841, X. 446.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



XCIV 



THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 



* Remarks on an amendment to the resolution fixing a day for adjourn- 
ment, so as to provide for the appointment of a select committee to report 
a bill for a Fiscal Bank. (Id. 446.) 

September 11.— Requests the reading again of a resolution establishmg 
rates of printing for the executive departments. (G. 27 C. i s. 1841, X. 449.) 

September 13.— Votes against a motion to go into executive session. 

(G. 27 C. I s. 1841, X. 453-) . 

December 6.— Appears as a Senator from Pennsylvania. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 

1841-1842, XL I.) 

December 14.— On the announcement of the standing committees, appears 
as a member of the Committee on Foreign Relations and of the Committee 
on Manufactures. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XI. 15.) 

December 15.— Presents petitions for hospitals on the western waters 
of Pennsylvania; also a memorial for piers on the Delaware. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 

1841-1842, XL 17.) 

December 20.— Remarks on Mangum's request to be excused from serv- 
ing on the Committee on Printing. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 30.) 

Presents a memorial concerning the Bankrupt Law; also a memorial 
of the Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce concerning the light at the mouth 
of the Delaware. (Id. 31.) 

Remarks concerning the Civil Appropriations Bill. (Id. 2>2.) 

December 21. — Presents petitions for the abolition of slavery. (G. 27 C. 
2 s. 1841-1842, XL 34.) 

Moves reference of the petition of Daniel Kiss to the Committee on 
Naval Affairs, which was agreed to. (Id. 34.) 

* Remarks on a motion to refer the bill to devote the proceeds of the 
sales of public lands to the public defence. (Id. 41.) Votes in favor of 
a motion to refer the bill to a select committee; also in favor of a motion 
to refer it to the Committee on Military Affairs. (Id. 44.) 

December 22. — Presents a petition for the improvement of Erie Harbor ; 
remarks on the subject. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 46.) 

Opposes a motion to print 3,000 extra copies of the report of the Secre- 
tary of the Treasury on the condition of the finances. (Id. 48.) 

December 23.— Moves that the petition of Peters, Moore & Co. be sent 
to the House of Representatives, which was agreed to. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841- 

1842, XL 51.) . , J. .^ ,. 

Remarks on a resolution for information concerning the distribution 

of the proceeds of the sales of public lands. (Id. 52.) 

December 27. — Presents a petition of the widow of J. D. Shaw for an 

indemnity for stores lost in the Essex. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 56.) 

* December 28.— Remarks on a motion to refer a bill to postpone the 
operation of the Bankrupt Law, with a view to its amendment. (G. 27 C. 
2 s. 1841-1842, XL 63-64.) Votes against a motion to refer it to the Com- 
mittee on the Judiciary. (Id. 64.) 

December 29.— Presents petitions for the alteration of the Bankrupt 
Law. Remarks on the subject. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842. XL 69.) 

* Speech on the question of establishing a Board of Exchequer. (Id. 69, 

Appendix, 43~46-) 

December 30.— Presents a memorial against an appropriation for carry- 
ing into effect the treaty with the Seneca Indians. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 

XL 75-) 

December 31. — Presents a petition for the amendment of the Bankrupt 
Law ; also petitions against confirmation of the treaty with the Seneca Indians. 
(G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 81.) 

G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.-s.=session.—*=^Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1842 xcv 

SENATE (Continued), 1842. 

January 5, 1842.— Presents a petition favoring a protective tariff; also 
a memorial against an appropriation to carry the treaty with the Seneca 
Indians into effect. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XI. 93.) 

Remarks on a motion to refer the report of the Secretary of the Treasury 
on the subject of an Exchequer Board. (Id. 93.) 

January 10. — Presents a memorial for the amendment of the Bankrupt 
Law; also a memorial for a custom-house at Philadelphia. Moves for per- 
mission to withdraw from the files the papers of Colonel Johnson, which 
was agreed to. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 109.) 

January 12. — Moves for leave to withdraw the papers on file of Samuel 
R. Slaymaker & Co., which was agreed to. Presents resolutions on the sub- 
ject of claims against France prior to 1800. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 
XI. 120.) 

January 13. — Presents and comments upon a memorial for the location 
of a national foundry at Lancaster, Pennsylvania. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 
XL 124.) 

January 17. — Presents memorials. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 136.) 

January 18. — Presents and comments upon a memorial against action 
on the Bankrupt Law. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 141.) 

Moves reference of the petition of Henry Simpson for remuneration 
for certain services, which was agreed to. (Id. 142.) 

January 19. — Presents a memorial against action on the Bankrupt Law; 
also a petition for the amendment or repeal of the Bankrupt Law ; also a 
petition for the improvement of Erie Harbor. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 

XL 145.) 

Votes against laying on the table a resolution calling on the Secretary 
of the Treasury for certain information concerning the revenues and financial 
affairs. (Id. 146.) 

January 20. — Presents a memorial against action on the Bankrupt Law; 
also a memorial for the amendment of the Bankrupt Law; also the petition 
of Hannah Hester for a pension ; also a memorial against Sunday mails and 
the distribution of mails on Sunday. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 148.) 

* Remarks on memorials in relation to the Bankrupt Law. (Id. 148.) 

* Remarks on an amendment to the Treasury Note Bill. (Id. 150.) 
Votes against the amendment. (Id. 150.) 

January 21. — Presents memorials for and against action on the Bankrupt 
Law. (G.'27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 152.) 

Votes against a motion to lay on the table the resolution concerning the 
revenues and financial affairs. (Id. 153.) 

Votes in favor of a substitute for the Treasury Note Bill. (Id. 155.) 
Votes in favor of an amendment to the bill. (Id. 157.) 

January 22. — Presents a memorial for the amendment or repeal of the 
Bankrupt Law; also a memorial for a duty on foreign glass. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 
1841-1842, XL 159.) 

Votes against the passage of the Treasury Note Bill. (Id. 160.) 

January 24. — Moves the postponement of joint resolutions for amend- 
ments to the Constitution, prohibiting the holding by a Senator or Repre- 
sentative of civil office under the Government, restricting the veto power, 
and authorizing the appointment of the Secretary of the Treasury by Con- 
gress. Motion agreed to. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 167.) 

January 25. — Presents a memorial against action on the Bankrupt Law ; 
also a memorial for the repeal of the Bankrupt Law. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 
XL 168.) 



G.=Congressional Globe. — C.=Congress.— s.=session. — *=Printed herein. 



xcvi THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

January 26. — Presents a memorial against action on the Bankrupt Law ; 
also a petition relating to discriminating duties. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 

XI. 172.) , . 

January 27.— Remarks during the speech of Mr. Archer on the resolution 
to restrict "the veto power. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL Appendix, 154.) 

January 2S. — Presents a memorial relating to the duty on iron. (G. 27 C. 
2 s. 1841-1842, XL 185.) 

Votes in favor of a bill to repeal the Bankrupt Law. (Id. 186.) 

January 31, February i. — Appointed a member of a committee to take 
action for superintending the funeral of Hon. Nathan F. Dixon. (G. 27 C. 
2 s. 1841-1S42, XI. 197, 199.) 

* February 2. — Speech on the joint resolution to amend the Constitu- 
tion with reference to the veto power. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 200, 
Appendix, 133-141.) 

* February 3. — Remarks on a resolution for the appomtment of a clerk 
to the Committee on Manufactures. Votes in favor of the resolution. (G. 
27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XI. 204, 205.) 

February 7. — Presents petitions for a dvitj^ on iron; also a memorial for 
locating a national foundry at Lancaster, Pennsylvania; also memorials for 
pensions for Mary Levely and J. D. Fowle. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 

2I3-') , , . . . 

* February 8. — Remarks on an amendment to the resolution to inquire 
into the expediency of a law for the division among assenting States of the 
shares of States dissenting from the distribution of the proceeds of the 
sales of public lands. Votes for the amendment. Votes against the resolution. 
(G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 217, Appendix, 146.) 

February 10. — Moves postponement of the order of the day for the 
purpose of taking up a bill to confirm land claims in Louisiana, which was 
agreed to. Remarks on the motion. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 224.) 

February 14. — Presents a memorial for a duty on iron; also a memorial 
for a protective tariff; also a memorial for the services of Judge Baldwin 
at the district court at Williamsburg; also a memorial relating to finance. 
(G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 230.) 

* Remarks on a resolution concerning an investigation of the New York 
Custom-house. (Id. 231-232.) Votes against a motion to lay the resolution 
on the table. (Id. 232.) 

February 16. — Presents a memorial against the execution of the treaty 
with the Seneca Indians; also memorials for a protective tariff, and a peti- 
tion for a duty on window-glass; also a memorial against the admission of 
slave States and the annexation of Texas. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 240.) 

* Remarks on a resolution relating to claims against Mexico. (Id. 241.) 
February 18.— Presents a memorial for a duty on iron. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 

1841-1842, XL 250.) 

* Remarks on the Compromise Act. (Id. 250.) 

February 21. — Presents memorials for a protective tariff; also petitions 
and memorials for the abolition of slavery. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 256.) 

Inquires also concerning the report of a select committee on a Board of 
Exchequer. (Id. 256.) 

February 28. — Presents a memorial for a protective duty; also memo- 
rials for a duty on iron. (G. 27 C 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 265.) 

Remarks on a bill to suspend a part of the bill continuing the corporate 
existence of the banks in the District of Columbia. (Id. 266.) 

March 2. — Presents a petition for a protective tariff; also memorials for 
a duty on iron. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 272.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*--= Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1842 xcvii 

March 3. — Presents a memorial for a duty on iron. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841- 

1842, XL 277.) . . . . , 

* March 4.— Remarks on a resolution for the distribution of printed 
copies of the laws and of state papers on public lands. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841- 
1842, XL 282.) 

Remarks on the order of business. (Id. 282.) 

March 7.— Presents memorials for a duty on iron. Remarks. Presents 
a memorial for a protective tariff. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 288.) 

Remarks relating to the bill to suspend a part of the District Bank Bill. 
Votes in favor of a motion to lay the bill on the table. (Id. 289.) 

March 8. — Presents and comments on a petition on the claim of William 
B. McMultrie. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 292.) 

* Remarks on a misrepresentation as to his age. (Id. 292.) 

* Remarks on the bill for the resumption of specie payments by the 
banks in the District of Columbia. (Id. 293-294.) Votes in favor of recom- 
mitting the bill. Votes in favor of a motion to lay the bill on the table. 
Further remarks ; suggests an amendment. Votes in favor of a motion to 
postpone the bill. (Id. 295.) 

March 9. — Votes against the passage of the bill for the resumption of 
specie payments by the banks in the District of Columbia. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 
1841-1842, XL 300.) 

March \i. — Presents memorials for refunding to General Andrew Jack- 
son the fine imposed on him in Louisiana, in 1815. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 

XL 309.) 

March 14. — Remarks as to the committee to which should be referred 
certain memorials on the work of Congress. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 

XL 315.) 

Presents the proceedings of a meeting favoring a protective tariff; also 
memorials for a duty on iron and for a protective tariff ; also memorials for 
refunding the fine imposed on General Andrew Jackson. (Id. 315.) 

March 15. — Remarks on a bill to amend the acts establishing United 
States judicial courts, with reference to jurors. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 

XL 319.) 

March 16. — Presents a memorial for refunding the fine imposed on Gen- 
eral Andrew Jackson ; also a petition relating to pensions ; also memorials 
for a duty on iron, for a protective duty, and for refunding duties illegally 
paid. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 322.) 

March 17. — Presents a memorial for a protective tariff. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 
1841-1842, XL 327.) 

Remarks as to the order of a bill reviving the neutrality law. (Id. 327.) 

March 21. — Presents memorials for a duty on iron; also a memorial 
relating to the importation of spirituous liquors ; also memorials for a pro- 
tective tariff; also a petition for the revival of the Pension Law of July, 
1838. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 340.) 

* Remarks on the resolution introduced by him at the last session on 
removals from ofllice. (Id. 341.) 

Remarks on his vote on Clay's resolutions for a tariff above the maxi- 
mum of the Compromise Act, for the repeal of the provision in the Distri- 
bution Act as to its suspension, and for retrenchment and economy. (Id. 
34I-) 

March 22. — Presents a memorial for a duty on iron ; also a memorial 
for a protective tariff. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 343.) 

Motion, and remarks thereon, for leave to withdraw the papers of 
Margaret Jamison, which was agreed to. (Id. 343.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=sessioii.—*= Printed herein, 
vii 



xcviii THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

Votes in favor of amendments to the bill amending the act for the 
distribution of the proceeds of the sales of public lands and for pre-emptions. 

(Id. 344.) 

* March 23.— Remarks on a bill assenting to a tax by Illmois on lands 
sold by the United States. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XI. 347.) 

Remarks during Clay's speech on his resolutions for retrenchment and 
tarifif reform. (Id. Appendix, 327.) 

March 24. — Presents a memorial for a protective tariff. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 

1841-1842, XL 351.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill removmg restrictions on pre- 
emption rights to public lands. (Id. 352.) 

Remarks relating to the resolutions concerning retrenchment and reform. 

(Id. 353.) , . . ^ 

April 5.— Votes against a substitute for the resolution concerning the 
distribution of the proceeds of the sales of public lands. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841- 

1842, XL 385.) 

Motion during a debate on the Loan Bill, for adjournment, which was 

agreed to. (Id. 386.) 

April 6.— Presents a memorial for the abolition of slavery, and against 
the annexation of Texas; also memorials for a duty on iron and for a pro- 
tective tariff. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 389-) 

Remarks on the Loan Bill. (Id. 391.) 

April 7.— Presents memorials for a duty on iron and for a protective 
tariff. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 394.) 

* Remarks in favor of an amendment to the Loan Bill, pledging the 
proceeds of the sales of public lands for redemption of the loan. (Id. 394, 
Appendix, 265-269.) 

April 8. — Presents a memorial for a duty on brushes. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 
1841-1842, XL 398.) 

* Remarks on an amendment to the Loan Bill, pledging the proceeds 
of the sales of public lands for redemption of the loan. (Id. 399, Appendix, 

283-284.) 

April 9. — Presents a memorial for a duty on coal ; also a memorial for 
refunding the fine imposed on General Jackson; also a memorial for a duty 
on iron. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 403.) 

Votes in favor of an amendment to the Loan Bill. (Id. 405.) 

April II. — Votes in favor of amendments to the Loan Bill. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 
1841-1842, XL 407, 408.) 

April 12. — Votes against a motion to reconsider the vote striking out 
the third section of the Loan Bill. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 413.) Votes 
in favor of the amendment striking out the third section. (Id. 413.) 
Remarks during the debate on the bill. (Id. 4I4-) 

April 13. — Votes against the passage of the Loan Bill. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 
1841-1842, XL 418.) 

* April 18.— Eulogy on Joseph Lawrence. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842. XL 

43I-) 

April 20. — Presents memorials for a protective tariff, and for a duty on 
iron and on flour of mustard, and in favor of the repeal of a certain pro- 
vision of the Tariff Law. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 432.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to recommit with instructions the bill to 
incorporate the Washington's Manual Labor School and INIale Orphan 
Asylum. (Id. 433.) 

April 21. — Presents several memorials relating to the tariff and to slavery. 
(G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 434-) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress. — s.=session. — *=Printed liereiii. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1842 xcix 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill to incorporate the Washington's 
Manual Labor School and Male Orphan Asylum. (Id. 435.) 

April 22. — Votes against laying on the table a resolution for information 
concerning the difficulties in Rhode Island. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 
438.) 

April 25. — Presents memorials on the tariff, on defence, and on British 
coastwise navigation. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 440.) 

Remarks on a question of the reference of a resolution as to rebuilding 
the light-house on Brandywine Shoals. (Id. 441.) 

April 26. — Presents a memorial for a higher duty on wire. (G. 27 C. 
2 s. 1841-1842, XL 443.) 

Remarks with reference to the bill to provide further remedial justice 
in United States courts. (Id. 444.) 

April 27. — Votes in favor of a motion to take up a resolution for infor- 
mation concerning the difficulties in Rhode Island. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 
XL 446.) 

* April 28. — Remarks on the Appropriation Bill, with reference to the 
compensation of the district attorney, clerk, and marshal of the Southern 
District of New York. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 450-451.) 

* April 29. — Remarks on an amendment to the Appropriation Bill. (G. 
27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 455.) Votes in favor of the amendment, which 
was adopted. (Id. 456.) 

April 30. — Presents memorials for a protective tariff; also a memorial 
against travelling and against opening the Post Office on the Sabbath. 
(G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 458.) 

* Remarks and votes on various amendments to the Appropriation Bill. 
(Id. 459, 460.) 

May 2. — Remarks on a point of order as to whether, on a motion to 
take up the resolution calling for information as to the difficulties in Rhode 
Island, the subject is debatable. Votes in favor of the motion. (G. 27 C. 
2 s.. 1841-1842, XL 462, 463.) 

May 3. — Votes in favor of an amendment to the Appropriation Bill. 
(G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 468.) 

May 4. — Votes in favor of a motion to postpone the bill providing for 
the apportionment of Representatives among the States. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841- 
1842, XL 473.) 

* Remarks on and votes on various amendments to the Appropriation 
Bill. (Id. 473, 474, 475.) 

May 9. — Presents a memorial for higher duties on saddlery, harness, 
coaches, and house furniture ; also memorials for tariff legislation ; and a 
memorial for the improvement of Erie Harbor. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 
XL 479.) 

* Speech on the bill to provide further remedial justice in United States 
courts. (Id. 480, Appendix, 382-388.) 

May 10. — Presents a memorial for a higher duty on umbrellas. (G. 
27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 484.) 

May II. — Remarks with reference to the bill for the apportionment of 
Representatives among the States. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 487.) 

Remarks on the International Copyright Bill. (Id. 487.) 

Remarks on the bill to provide for remedial justice in United States 
courts. (Id. 488.) 

May 12. — Presents memorials for a protective tariff. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841- 
1842, XL 492.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session. — *=Printed herein. 



c THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

Votes in favor of a motion to take up the bill to refund to General 
Jackson the fine of $i,ooo imposed on him in 1815. (Id. 492.) 

* Remarks in favor of the bill. (Id. 493, Appendix, 362-363, 365-366.) 
ji^ay 13.— Presents a memorial against reduction of the duty on gold 

and silver. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XI. 496.) 

May 17.— Votes in favor of a motion to take up the resolution in relation 
to affairs in Rhode Island. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XI. 506.) 

* xMay 18.— Remarks with reference to the Apportionment Bill. (G. 27 C. 
2 s. 1841-1842, XI. 510.) 

Presents memorials for a protective tariff. (Id. 510.) 

Votes against laying on the table the subject of a resolution declaring 
the right of Rhode Island to establish a constitutional republican form of 
State Government. (Id. 510.) 

Participates in a debate on the bill to indemnify General Jackson for the 
fine imposed on him in 1815. (Id. 511, Appendix, 376.) 

May 19. — Votes against an amendment to the bill to refund to General 
Jackson the fine imposed on him in 1815. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XI. 515.) 
Votes against a substitute, refunding the fine and declaring that the act 
.shall not be construed as an expression of opinion upon any judicial pro- 
ceeding or legal question growing out of General Jackson's declaration of 
martial law. Votes against engrossing the substitute for a third reading. 

(Id. 515.) 

May 23.— Presents the proceedings of a meetmg m favor of a protective 

tariff. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XI. 523-) 

Votes in favor of a motion to take up the resolution fixing a day of 
adjournment. (Id. 523.) 

May 24. — Remarks with reference to a resolution relating to executive 
business. (Id. 526.) 

* Remarks on the Apportionment Bill. (Id. 527, Appendix, 392.) 

May 25. — Suggests passing over informally the resolution relating to 
executive business and taking up the Apportionment Bill, which was agreed 
to. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XI. 532.) 

Votes against concurring in a committee amendment to the Apportion- 
ment Bill. Votes in favor of an amendment changing the ratio of repre- 
sentation. Moves adjournment, which was agreed to. (Id. 534.) 

May 26. — Presents a memorial for the removal of the duty on quick- 
silver, and for enhancing the duty on tartaric acid; also a memorial for a 
protective tariff. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 537.)^ 

Moves an amendment to the Apportionment Bill, fixing the ratio of 
representation at 70,680. (Id. 538, 539.) 

* Remarks on the bill. (Id. Appendix. 410-412.) 

May 27. — Presents a memorial for the alteration of the duty on jewelry; 
also a memorial for a protective tariff. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 543.) 

* Remarks on the Apportionment Bill. (Id. 545, 546, Appendix, 438- 

439-) 

Votes against several motions fixing the ratio of apportionment. Votes 

in favor of two motions fixing the ratio. Votes in favor of a motion fixing 

the ratio at 71,257. (Id. 546.) Remarks on a motion to adjourn. (Id. 

546.) 

May 30. — Votes in favor of reconsidering the vote rejecting a motion to 

fix the ratio of apportionment. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 548.) Votes in 

favor of a motion to fix the ratio at 70,680. (Id. 550.) 

May 31. — Remarks on a resolution for continuing in the employment of 

the Senate certain employees at a compensation allowed them, and con- 



G.=CongressionaI Globe.— C.=Congress. — s.=session. — *=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1842 ci 

tinuing the clerk of the presiding officer. Moves an amendment to strike 
out the continuance of the clerk, which was agreed to. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841- 

1842, XL 557.) , . . r 

June 1.— Remarks as to taking up a resolution for the appomtment ot 
a corps of reporters. Remarks on a motion to lay the resolution on the 
table; votes in favor of the motion. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 560, 561.) 

Votes against an amendment to the Apportionment Bill, relating to 
voting districts and representation. (Id. 563.) 

June 2.— Remarks on taking up the resolution for the appointment of 
reporters for the Senate. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 566.) 

June 3. — Remarks on taking up the Apportionment Bill. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 
1841-1842, XL 571.) Remarks on an amendment relating to voting districts 
and representation. (Id. 573.) 

June 4.— Remarks as to taking up the bill to carry into efifect the com- 
pact with Alabama and Mississippi, relative to the five per cent, fund and 
the school reservations. Remarks on the bill. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 

XL 576.) 

* Remarks on the amendment to the Apportionment Bill, relatmg to 
voting districts and representation. (Id. 577-578, Appendix, 449-451.) 

June 6. — Presents a memorial for a protective tariff. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841- 
1842, XL 582.) 

Remarks on taking up the Apportionment Bill. (Id. 583.) 

June 7. — Presents a memorial for a higher duty on manufactured tobacco. 
(G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 587.) 

Votes in favor of an amendment to the Apportionment Bill, with respect 
to voting districts. (Id. 590.) 

June 8.— Remarks on the question of the reference of the Army Appro- 
priation Bill. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 595.) 

Votes in favor of taking up the Apportionment Bill. (Id. 595.) Votes 
against various amendments. (Id. 597.) 

Votes against two motions to adjourn. (Id. 598.) 

* June 9. — Votes on various amendments to the Apportionment Bill. 
(G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 601, 602.) 

Votes against a motion to postpone the further consideration of the bill. 
Votes against engrossing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 603.) 

June 10. — Presents memorials for a protective tariff; also a memorial 
for fortifying the Gulf of Mexico. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 607.) 

* Remarks on the Apportionment Bill. (Id. 608, 609, 611, 612.) 

Votes against a motion to reconsider the vote on an amendment. (Id. 
613.) Votes in favor of various amendments. Votes against the passage of 
the bill. (Id. 614.) 

June 13. — Presents a petition for pensions to officers and soldiers who 
served under General Wayne; also a memorial for a protective tariff. (G. 
27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 614.) 

June 14. — Votes in favor of an amendment to the bill to provide for 
the armed occupation and the settlement of the unsettled part of East Florida. 
(G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 624.) 

Remarks on an amendment to the Navy Appropriation Bill, concerning 
the number of officers in the Navy. (Id. 626.) 

June 15. — Presents a memorial for the exemption of soda ash from duty; 
also memorials for a protective tariff. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 630.) 

Remarks on a motion to insist on Senate amendments to the Apportion- 
ment Bill not concurred in by the House. Votes against a motion to insist 
on the amendment providing that such States as have a fraction of more 



G.=Congressional Globe. — C.=Congress.— s.=session. — *=Printed herein. 



cii THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

than a moiety of the ratio shall be entitled to an additional Representative. 
Votes in favor of a motion to insist on the amendment increasing the ratio 
from 50.176 to 70,680. (Id. 630.) 

* Remarks on an amendment to the Naval Appropriation Bill, providing 
against the increase in the number of officers. (Id. 632.) 

June 16. — Presents and comments upon a memorial for a marine railway- 
in the port of Philadelphia ; also resolutions of the Pennsylvania Legislature 
in favor of the x-Vpportionment Bill; and memorials for a protective tariff. 
(G. 27 C 2 s. 1841-1842, XI. 637-) 

Remarks on the bill to extend for a limited period the present tariff 
laws. Votes in favor of reading the bill a second time. (Id. 638.) 

Votes against a motion to strike out from the Naval Appropriation 
Bill a proviso against the increase in the number of officers. (Id. 639.) 
Votes against an amendment increasing the appropriation for a naval con- 
structor at Pensacola, Florida. (Id. 641.) 

June 17. — Votes in favor of a motion to increase the appropriation for 
the Navy. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 647.) 

* Remarks on an amendment providing against the increase of officers. 

(Id. 647.) 

Votes in favor of such an amendment. (Id. 648.) Offers and comments 
upon an amendment providing for a marine railway or floating dock at Phila- 
delphia. Amendment rejected. (Id. 648.) 

June 18. — Presents a memorial for a protective tariff. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 
1841-1842, XL 650.) 

* Remarks on the order of business. (Id. 655, 656-657.) 

June 21. — Votes in favor of a motion to take up the resolutions calling 
for information concerning the difficulties in Rhode Island. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 
1841-1842, XL 660.) 

June 22. — Presents memorials for creating stock to be distributed among 
the States, based upon the public lands, and pledging the proceeds of the 
sales of such lands for the redemption of such stock; also a memorial for a 
protective tariff. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 664.) 

June 23. — Remarks as to the reference of a bill fixing the fiscal year of 
the United States Treasury. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 668.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to lay on the table the bill to extend for a 
limited period the present tariff laws. Votes in favor of a motion to adjourn. 
(Id. 670.) Votes in favor of an amendment to suspend the provisions of 
.some sections of the act to appropriate the proceeds of sales of public 
lands. Moves an adjournment, which was not agreed to. Remarks on a 
motion to suspend the distribution of the proceeds of sales of public lands. 
Moves an adjournment, which was agreed to. (Id. 671, 672.) 

* June 24. — Remarks on an amendment to the Tariff Bill, suspending 
the distribution of the proceeds of sales of public lands till August i, 1842. 
(G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 677-678.) Votes in favor of striking out a 
part of the amendment. Votes in favor of a motion to strike out the amend- 
ment. Votes against the bill, which was passed. (Id. 678, 679.) 

* June 25. — Remarks on the Army Organization Bill. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 
1841-1842, XL 684.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to strike out the second section of the bill, 
relating to the superintendents of certain armories. Moves to strike out 
the third section, abolishing the commissary-general of purchases. Remarks 
on his motion, which was lost. Moves an adjournment, which was negatived. 
Further remarks. (Id. 685.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Cotigress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1842 ciii 

June 29.— Presents memorials for a protective tariff. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841- 

1842, XL 690.) . ^ . . , , • 

Votes in favor of a resolution as to the presentation of rejected claims 

against the United States. (Id. 690.) 

* Renews his motion to strike out the third section of the Army Organi- 
zation Bill, abolishing the office of commissary-general of purchases. Remarks 
on the motion, which was negatived. (Id. 692-693.) 

June 30. — Presents a memorial for a protective duty on iron, and on 
cotton, woollen, and silk stuffs. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XI. 697-) 

Remarks on the provision in the Army Organization Bill relating to 

rations. (Id. 698.) 

* /jjy I.— Presents the proceedings of a meeting in favor of a protective 
tariff. Remarks on the subject. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XI. 702.) 

Remarks on the question of printing a report of the Committee on 
Manufactures on the part of the President's message of December 7th relat- 
ing to the tariff. (Id. 707, 708.) 

Remarks on the question of postponing till July 4th the bill to provide 
further remedial justice in United States courts. (Id. 708.) 

July 2. — Presents a memorial for the creation of stock to be distributed 
among the States; also a memorial for a protective tariff. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 
1841-1842, XL 710.) 

Moves to lay on the table a bill to authorize the importation, free of 
duty, of two iron steamboats for Western waters. The motion prevailed. 

(Id. 710.) 

Votes in favor of an amendment to the bill to refund the balance due to 
Massachusetts for disbursements during the late war. (Id. 711.) 

July 5. — Presents a memorial for a marine railway at Philadelphia. 
(G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 718.) 

Votes against engrossing for a third reading a bill to settle the accounts 
of Joseph Nourse. (Id. 719.) 

* Remarks on a bill to increase the compensation of Federal judges. 
(Id. 719, 720.) Votes against several amendments to increase the compensa- 
tion of certain judges. (Id. 721.) Votes against engrossing the bill for a 
third reading. (Id. 721.) 

July 6. — Votes against and speaks on various amendments to the Judicial 
System' Bill. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 723.) 

July 7. — Remarks and votes on various amendments to the bill providing 
further remedial justice in United States courts. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 
XL 729, 730.) 

Votes against engrossing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 730.) 

* July 8. — Remarks on a motion for leave to introduce two bills in rela- 
tion to the tariff. Votes against a motion, which prevailed, to lay on the 
table the motion for leave to introduce the bills. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 

XL 734-) 

Votes against the passage of a bill to incorporate the National Institute 
for the Promotion of Science. (Id. 734.) 

Votes against the passage of the bill to provide further remedial justice 
in United States district courts. (Id. 734, Appendix, 558.) 

July II. — Presents memorials for the creation of stock to be distributed 
among the States, as the basis of a sound currency. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841- 
1842; XL 739.) 

July 12. — Presents a memorial from James Reeside for the payment of 
his claim. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 743.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session. — *=Printed herein. 



civ THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

Remarks on a bill concerning the times of holding the United States 
district courts in Western Pennsylvania. (Id. 743.) 

July 15.— Remarks on a bill for an edition of the United States laws 
to be compiled and printed, and for its distribution. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 

XI. 756.) 

jiily 18. — Votes in favor of a motion for leave to introduce a bill to 
repeal the Bankrupt Act of 1841. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 763.) 

Moves the taking up of a joint resolution for the benefit of George 
Schnabel and Robert Barber, Jr. Explains the resolution. (Id. 764.) 

July 19.— Presents a memorial of James O'Connor regarding his steam- 
engine improvement. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 766.) 

Remarks on the bill for the relief of the widow of William Besly. 

(Id. 767.) 

July 21.— Speaks and votes against an amendment to the bill for the 
settlement of claims growing out of the military occupation of Florida. 
(G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 772.) 

July 22. — Presents a memorial for a protective tariff. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 
1841-1842, XL 776.) 

* Remarks on the bill for the reduction of postage and concerning the 
franking privilege. (Id. 776.) 

July 23.— Remarks on the bill for the settlement of claims arising under 
the treaty with the Choctaw Indians at Dancing Rabbit Creek. (G. 27 C. 
2 s. 1841-1842, XL 781.) 

Remarks on the bill for the reduction of postage and concerning the 
franking privilege. (Id. 781, 782.) Votes against a certain schedule of rates 
of postage. (Id. 782.) 

July 25.— Remarks on the bill for the settlement of claims arising under 
the treaty with the Choctaw Indians at Dancing Rabbit Creek. (G. 27 C. 
2 s. 1841-1842, XL 786.) 

July 26.— Further remarks on the above bill. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 

XI. 790.) 

* July 27. — Remarks on the bill for the reduction of postage. (G. 27 C. 
2 s. 1841-1842, XL 796.) 

July 29. — Presents documents relating to the steam-engine improvement 
of James O'Connor. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 805.) 

* July 30. — Remarks and votes on several amendments to the Tariff Bill. 
Moves to strike out the section repealing the proviso for the distribution 
of the proceeds of sales of public lands. Remarks on the subject. (G. 27 C. 
2 s. 1841-1842, XL 814, 815.) 

August I. — Votes against a motion for leave to introduce a bill reduc- 
ing from five to two years the term of residence required for naturalization. 
(G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 817.) 

Votes in favor of a House substitute for the bill to provide for the 
armed settlement of a part of the peninsula of Florida. (Id. 818.) 

* Remarks on the Tariff Bill. (Id. 819-821, Appendix. 708-711.) 
August 2. — Votes against an amendment to the Navy Pension Bill. 

(G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 826.) 

Votes in favor of his motion to strike out the section of the Tariff Bill 
repealing the proviso for the distribution of the proceeds of sales of public 
lands. (Id. 829.) 

August 3. — Votes on a number of amendments to the Tariff BilL 
(G. 27 C. 2 s^. 1841-1842, XL 834, 835, 836, 837.) 

August 4. — Votes in favor of several amendments to the Tariff Bill. 
(G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 842, 844.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.-*= Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1842 cv 

August 5. — Votes in favor of a motion to recommit the Tariff Bill, with 
instructions. Votes against the passage of the bill. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 
XI. 850, 852.) 

August 8. — Remarks on a bill extending the time within which duties 
for railroad iron imported by Michigan, being laid for permanent use, may 
be remitted. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 857.) 

* Remarks on the bill for the establishment of naval schools. (Id. 859- 
860.) 

August 9.— Votes against several amendments to the Navy Pension Bill. 
(G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 863.) 

Participates in the discussion on a bill for the establishment of police in 
the city of Washington. (Id. 864.) 

Participates in the debate on the bill for the establishment of naval 
schools. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 864.) 

August 10. — Remarks on the bill extending the time within which duties 
for railroad iron imported by Michigan may be remitted. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 
1841-1842, XL 870.) 

Remarks on a motion to lay on the table a bill to authorize contracts for 
steam vessels for the Navy. (Id. 871.) 

* August II. — Remarks on the bill for the reorganization of the Marine 
Corps. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 877.) 

Votes against engrossing for a third reading the bill to establish police 
for the city of Washington. (Id. 876.) 

August 12. — Votes in favor of postponing indefinitely a bill for the relief 
of the representatives of John H. Stone. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 883.) 

* August 13. — Remarks on the Pension Bill. Votes against a motion 
to strike out the section allowing pensions to the widows of soldiers dying 
after the acts of 1836 and 1838. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a 
third reading, which was ordered. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 885-886.) 

August 15. — Moves the postponement of a bill for adjustment of the 
claims of New Orleans to lands occupied by the United States, which was 
agreed to. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 890.) 

Remarks on a resolution fixing a day for adjournment. Votes in favor 
of a motion to lay the resolution on the table. (Id. 890.) 

Supports a bill for the relief of John Underwood. (Id. 890.) 

Moves adjournment, which was agreed to. (Id. 890.) 

August 16. — Votes against ordering to a third reading a bill for the 
relief of the Springfield Manufacturing Company. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 
XL 893.) 

Supports a bill for the relief of Charles F. Sibbald, for false arrest by a 
United States officer. Moves an amendment to refer the claim to the Third 
Auditor of the Treasury for settlement; amendment agreed to. (Id. 894.) 

August 17. — Votes in favor of a motion to concur in the report of the 
Conference Committee on the Army Reorganization Bill. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 
1841-1842, XL 903.) 

Votes against a motion to reconsider the vote on the bill making an 
appropriation for a deficiency in the Navy Pension fund ; motion lost. Votes 
in favor of ordering the bill to a third reading, which was agreed to. 
(Id. 903.) 

August 19. — Demands the yeas and nays on a motion to take up the 
resolution fixing a day for adjournment. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 913.) 

Votes against a resolution to recommit the Webster-Ashburton Treaty. 
(G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. I.) 

* Speech on the Webster-Ashburton Treaty. (Id. Appendix, loi-iio.) 



G.=Congressional Globe. — C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*= Printed herein. 



CVl 



THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 



August 20.— Votes in favor of a motion to lay on the table the resolution 
fixing a day for adjournment. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XI. 919.) 

Votes against retaining the 8th article of the Webster-Ashburton Treaty ; 
question determined in the affirmative. Votes against retaining a part of the 
1st article; question determined in the affirmative. Votes in favor of a 
resolution to recommit the treaty with instructions to report an amendment 
for the safe departure of vessels driven by stress to any of the British West 
Indian islands; resolution rejected. Votes against retaining that part of the 
5th article relating to expenses for protecting the disputed territory and 
paying Maine and Massachusetts for assenting to the line of boundary; 
question determined in the affirmative. Votes against the resolution advising 
and consenting to the ratification of the treaty; resolution adopted. (G. 27 C. 
3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 1-2.) 

August 23.— Remarks on a bill for grants of bounty land due on account 
of the services of Major-General Duportail, Brigadier-General Armand, and 
Major de la Combe. Moves the indefinite postponement of the bill, which 
was agreed to. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 927.) 

Votes against a motion to take up the bill to regulate the takmg of 
testimony in contested election cases. Requests the reading of the bill, 
which was done. (Id. 927.) Votes in favor of an amendment to repeal 
the act for the apportionment of Representatives according to the sixth 
census. (Id. 929.) 

August 24.— Votes in favor of amendments to the bill to regulate the 
taking of testimony in contested election cases. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 
XL 932.) Votes against a motion to postpone the bill, for the purpose of 
taking up a joint resolution fixing the day of adjournment; motion lost. 
Votes in favor of several further amendments. (Id. 933.) 

August 25.— Votes against laying on the table a resolution calling for 
information as to the possible revenue, had the Revenue Bill become a law. 
(G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, XL 935.) 

* Votes and speaks on a number of amendments to the Revenue Bill. 

(Id. 936-937, 938.) . 

Votes in favor of reading a second time a resolution concerning the 
pay of members and disallowing compensation for voluntary absence. (Id. 
939.) 

August 26. — Votes and speaks on a great number of amendments to the 
Revenue Bill. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842. XL 943, 944, 945-) 

Remarks on a motion to adjourn. (Id. 946.) Votes in favor of a 
motion to adjourn. (Id. 947.) 

* Atigust 27.— Remarks on the Tariff Bill. (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842, 
XL 950-952.) Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading. 
(Id. 960.) 

August 29. — Remarks on an amendment to the Fortifications Appropria- 
tion Bill (G. 27 C. 2 s. 1841-1842. XL 969) 

August 30. — Votes against a motion to lay on the table a resolution for 
information as to the conferences between the American negotiator and the 
British special minister, in relation to the payment, assumption, or guarantee 
of State debts by the United States; motion lost. Votes against a motion, 
which prevailed, to table the resolution and a substitute for removing the 
injunction of secrecy from the proceedings and debates on the treaty. Sub- 
mits a resolution, which was adopted, to remove the injunction of secrecy 
from the proceedings and debates on the treaty, as soon as the treaty shall 
have been proclaimed after the exchange of ratifications. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842- 
1843, XII. 2.) 

G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1843 cvii 

* August 31. — Remarks on unadvised legislation, with reference to the 
bill for the relief of the heirs of Major-General Baron De Kalb. (G. 27 C 
2 s. 1841-1842, XL 977.) 

December 5. — Appears as a Senator from Pennsylvania. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 

1842-1843, XII. 30.) 

December 12.— On the announcement of the standing committees, appears 
as a member of the Connnittee on Foreign Relations and of the Committee 
on Manufactures. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 40; S. Doc. 4, 27 C. 3 s.) 

Presents a memorial for the exemption of unmanufactured furs from 
duty. (Id. 40.) 

December 15. — Presents a memorial for the adoption of the warehouse 
system as a part of the revenue system. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 54.) 

December 19. — Presents a memorial for the exemption of hatters' unman- 
ufactured furs from duty. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 61.) 

December 21. — Presents a memorial for the repeal of the duty on 
unmanufactured furs. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 69.) 

December 22. — Presents a memorial of the widow of James Reeside for 
payment of claim. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 73.) 

Votes in favor of a resolution calling for information whether the 
British minister made any proposition for the assumption or guarantee of 
State debts by the United States. (Id. 75.) 

* Remarks on the bill to indemnify General Jackson for the fine imposed 
on him at New Orleans, in 1815. (Id. 75, Appendix, 6g.) 

December 27. — Presents a memorial for refunding General Jackson's 
fine ; also a memorial for the issue by the Government of stock or certifi- 
cates of loan to the States, as a basis for a sound currency ; and a memorial 
for the continuance of the Bankrupt Law. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 84.) 

December 29. — Presents a memorial for the repeal of the Bankrupt Law. 
(G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 94.) 

SENATE (Continued), 1843. 

January 3, 1843. — Presents a resolution calling for information concern- 
ing cloth cases involving forfeitures for violations of the revenue laws. 
(G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 104.) It was adopted, January 5, 1843. 
(Id. 118.) 

January 4. — Presents a memorial for the repair of a pier on Reedy 
Island ; also a memorial for refunding General Jackson's fine ; and a memorial 
for clearing obstructions in the Ohio and Mississippi rivers. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 
1842-1843, XII. no.) 

January s. — Presents a memorial in favor of the warehouse system. 
(G. 27 C. 3 s.' 1842-1843, XII. 118.) 

January 6. — Presents a memorial for the repeal of the Bankrupt Law. 
(G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 127.) 

January 10. — Remarks on the report of the Secretary of the Treasury 
in relation to cloth cases involving forfeitures for violation of the revenue 
laws. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 140.) 

Remarks on a motion to print the report on General Jackson's fine. 
(Id. 142.) 

January 11. — Votes. in favor of a resolution to print 10,000 extra copies 
of the majority report, and 20,000 of the minority report, on the bill to 
refund General Jackson's fine. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 149.) 

January 13. — Credentials as Senator from Pennsylvania for six years, 
from March 4, 1843, laid before the Senate. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, 
XIL 158.) 



G.=Congressional Globe. — C.=Congress. — s.=session. — *=Printed herein. 



cviii THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

January i6. — Presents a memorial in favor of a Board of Exchequer; 
also a memorial for the issue of stock certificates to the States ; and a memo- 
rial of Christopher Doughty for a pension. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 
161.) 

January 17.— Presents the petition of the widow of Philip Krug, a Revo- 
lutionary soldier, for the renewal of half-pensions to the widows of Revolu- 
tionary officers and soldiers. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 164.) 

Remarks during a discussion on the destruction of steamboats on the 
Ohio and Mississippi rivers. (Id. 165.) 

January 19. — Remarks on a bill for the relief of the Petersburg Railroad 
Company, with reference to the importation of railroad iron. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 

1842-1843, XII. I75-) 

* January 20.— Remarks on the bill for the relief of the Petersburg Rail- 
road Company. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 181-182.) 

Participates in a debate on the bill to repeal the Bankrupt Law. (Id. 

181.) 

January 23. — Presents memorials for a Board of Exchequer: also a peti- 
tion of James Gee for pension arrears; and a memorial of Edward Dexter 
for indemnity for the capture of the schooner Betsy by a French privateer, 
prior to 1800. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 185.) 

* Remarks on the bill for the relief of the Petersburg Railroad Company. 
(Id. 187, 188.) 

Votes against the passage of the bill. (Id. 188.) 

January 25. — Presents a memorial against the repeal of the Bankrupt 
Law. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843. XII. 198.) 

January 27.— Remarks on resolutions of the Delaware Legislature urging 
the retrocession from the United States to Delaware of Pea Patch Island. 
(G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 211.) 

Presents a memorial for the repeal of the Bankrupt Law. (Id. 211.) 

January 30. — Presents memorials for the release of Mr. Kendall. (G. 
27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 219-220.) 

Presents a memorial of Samuel Raub concerning his invention of a 
mode of preventing the explosion of steam-boilers. (Id. 220.) 

Suggests postponement of the bill for the relief of the West Feliciana 
Railroad and Banking Company and the Grand Gulf Railroad Company, 
which was agreed to. (Id. 220.) 

February i. — Presents a memorial for the creation of stock to be dis- 
tributed among the States. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 229.) 

Remarks on the commitment of the bill for the occupation and settle- 
ment of Oregon Territory. (Id. 230.) Moves adjournment, which was 
agreed to. (Id. 230.) 

February 3. — Presents a memorial for the repeal of the Bankrupt Law. 
(G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XTI. 238.) 

Participates in the discussion on the bill for the occupation and settle- 
ment of Oregon Territory. (Id. 239.) Votes against a motion to commit 
the bill. Votes against a motion to strike out the clause giving a bounty 
to each settler. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third reading. 
(Id. 240.) 

February 6. — Presents a memorial of the Pittsburg Board of Trade for 
the improvement of Western rivers; also memorials for the reconstruction of 
the pier at Port Penn and for continuing the coast survey. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 
1842-1843, XII. 243.) 

February 7. — Votes against a motion to reconsider the vote by which 
the bill for the occupation and settlement of Oregon Territory was passed. 
(G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 252.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congre.ss.—s.=session.—*= Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1843 cix 

February 8. — Presents and comments upon a memorial for establishing 
a regular line of packets to Chagres and an overland mail to Panama. 
(G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 255.) 

* February 9.— Remarks on a resolution for the establishment of agencies 
for the inspection and purchase of water-rotted hemp for the Navy. Votes 
in favor of engrossing an amendment and reading the resolution a third time. 
(G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 263.) 

Remarks on the question of taking up the bills for augmenting the 
Marine Corps and for the reorganization of the Navy. (Id. 263.) 

Moves that a bill for the relief of John Gerald Ford be laid on the table, 
which was agreed to. (Id. 264.) 

February 10. — Presents a memorial for the issue of stock, based on the 
public lands, to be distributed among the States. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, 
XII. 266.) 

* Remarks on an amendment to the Army Appropriation Bill, providing 
for meteorological observations. (Id. 268.) 

February 13. — Presents a memorial for establishing by law the current 
value of German coin ; also a memorial for an issue of stock based on the 
public lands ; and a memorial for restoring Mr. Kendall to his personal 
liberty and remunerating him for losses. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 275.) 

* February 14. — Remarks on resolutions for reduction of the tariff, re- 
trenchment, and economy. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 282.) 

February 15. — Votes against laying the foregoing resolutions on the 
table. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 289.) 

February 16. — Votes against a motion to postpone the resolutions con- 
cerning the assumption of State debts. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 296.) 

February ly. — Votes in favor of taking up the foregoing resolutions. 
(G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 299.) 

February 18 — Votes against a motion to lay the resolutions on the table. 
(G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 304.) Remarks with reference to the resolu- 
tions. (Id. 306.) Votes against a motion to postpone the subject. (Id. 308.) 

February 20. — Presents a memorial for a drawback on exports of dis- 
tilled spirits. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 311.) 

Votes against laying on the table resolutions against the power of the 
Government to assume State debts by the issue of stock. (Id. 315.) 

Remarks on the bill to refund General Jackson's fine. Votes against 
a substitute by which the fine was simply to be restored to General Jackson. 
Votes against another substitute, refunding the fine and costs, but expressing 
no opinion. (Id. 316.) 

February 21. — Votes in favor of the passage of the bill for refunding 
General Jackson's fine. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 321.) 

Remarks on the question of taking up the Bankrupt Bill. (Id. 322.) 

Remarks on an amendment to the Navy Appropriation Bill. (Id. 322.) 

February 22. — Votes against a motion to lay on the table the resolutions 
against the assumption of State debts. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 2)'^7.) 

Votes against an amendment to the Navy Appropriation Bill. (Id. 328.) 

Gives notice that he would, on the next day, ask leave to introduce 
a bill in relation to holding a court in the Western District of Pennsylvania. 
(Id. 328.) 

Remarks on the question of fixing a day for the consideration of Bayard's 
resolution to rescind the Expunging Resolution. (Id. 328.) 

February 23. — Introduces a bill for holding a court in the Western Dis- 
trict of Pennsylvania. On his motion, the bill was considered, reported, and 
finally passed. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 331.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



ex THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

Votes against an amendment to the Navy Appropriation Pill, to recommit 
the bill with instructions. (Id. 336.) 

Remarks on the bill for the relief of the West Feliciana Railroad and 
the Grand Gulf Railroad and Banking Company. (Id. 336-337-) 

February 24. — Remarks on the bill for the relief of Mary Crawford. 
(G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 341.) 

Participates in the discussion on amendments to the bill to repeal the 
Bankrupt Law. Calls for division of the question on the amendments. 

(Id. 342.) 

* February 25. — Votes and speaks on several amendments to the bill 
for the repeal of the Bankrupt Law. Votes in favor of the passage of the 
bill. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 347-349-) 

February 27. — Makes a motion to lay on the table a bill for the publica- 
tion of the Congressional debates. Motion lost. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, 

XII. 354, 355-) 

Votes in favor of a motion to postpone the bill indefinitely. Remarks 
on the bill. Votes in favor of a motion to recommit the bill. Further 
remarks. Votes in favor of a number of amendments. (Id. 356, 357.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to adjourn, which was lost. Votes in favor 
of several amendments. (Id. 357.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to lay the bill on the table, which was lost. 
Votes in favor of an amendment. Votes in favor of a motion to adjourn, 
which was lost. Remarks on a motion to postpone ; votes in favor of the 
motion. (Id. 358.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to go into executive session. (Id. 359.) 

February 28. — Votes in favor of an amendment to the bill to extend 
the charters of the banks in the District of Columbia. Offers and speaks 
upon an amendment making suspension of specie payments ground for for- 
feiture; amendment agreed to. Votes against an amendment. (G. 27 C. 
3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 365-) 

March i. — Moves the consideration of House bills on the calendar, which 
was agreed to. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 370.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to lay on the table the bill to extend the 
charters of the District banks. Votes against the passage of the bill. (Id. 

37I-) 

Votes against the passage of a bill to refund to Massachusetts a balance 
for disbursements during the War of 1812. (Id. 371.) 

Participates in the discussion on a bill for the relief of the widow of 
Captain William Royall. (Id. 371.) 

Remarks on the order of business. (Id. 371.) 

March 2. — Moves to table a resolution concerning losses of property in 
Florida Territory in consequence of the Seminole War; which was agreed 
to. (G. 27 C 3 s- 1842-1843, XII. 376.) 

Participates in the discussion on a bill in relation to records of land 
patents and other evidences of title. (Id. 377.) 

Remarks on the ])ill to authorize the reissue of Treasury notes. (Id. 
380, 381.) 

Remarks and votes on several amendments to the General Appropriation 
Bill. (Id. 382, 383-) 

* March 3. — Remarks on a bill for pensions to the widows of Revo- 
lutionary officers and soldiers. Votes and speaks on several amendments. 
Votes aye on the passage of the bill. (G. 27 C. 3 s. 1842-1843, XII. 388, 389.) 

Votes against a motion to insist on the Senate amendments to the General 
Appropriation Bill. (Id. 391.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.= Congress. —s.=session.—* --Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1844 cxi 

Votes against a motion to lay on the table a bill providing for future 
intercourse with China. Votes against a motion to strike out " reciprocity " 
from terms of intercourse. (Id. 392.) 

Votes against a motion to concur with a conference report on the 
amendments to the General Appropriation Bill. (Id. 393.) 

Moves for leave to withdraw the papers of Mr. McMurtrie from the 
files, which was agreed to. (Id. 394.) 

December 4. — Appears as a Senator from Pennsylvania. (G. 28 C. 1 s. 
1843-1844, XIII. 2.) 

December 6. — Presents a memorial of the executrix of James Reeside, 
concerning a claim against the Post Office Department. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843- 
1844, XIII. 13.) 

December 11. — On the announcement of the standing committees, appears 
as a member of the Committee on Foreign Relations and of the Committee 
on Manufactures. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 22; S. Doc. 4, 28 C. i s.) 

Moves reference of the petition of Mary Reeside to the Committee on 
the Judiciary. (Id. 22.) 

December 15. — Remarks on a question of reference of an act of the 
Missouri Legislature in relation to the boundary between that State and 
Iowa Territory. (G. 28 C i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 36.) 

December 21. — Presents a memorial for the repair of piers at Port Penn. 
Remarks on the subject. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 56.) 

* Remarks on a bill to settle the title to Pea Patch Island. (Id. 57, 58.) 

SENATE (Continued), 1844. 

January 2, 1844. — Presents memorials for the relief of American citi- 
zens confined in British prisons during the War of 1812; also memorials 
relating to French spoliation claims, naval pensions, reduction of postage 
rates, and the tariff. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 90.) 

Jatniary 3. — Presents a memorial for postage reduction. (G. 28 C. i s. 
1843-1844, XIII. 96.) 

January 4. — Presents and comments upon a memorial for the completion 
of the works in Erie Harbor. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 100.) 

January 8. — Presents a memorial for drawback on exports of spirits 
distilled from foreign syrups ; also a memorial for continuing the works in 
Erie Harbor. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 115.) 

* Remarks on a resolution for correspondence on the subject of the title 
to, and occupation of, Oregon since March 4, 1841. Votes against the reso- 
lution. (Id. 116, 117, Appendix, 104.) 

January 9. — Remarks on a motion to postpone indefinitely a resolution 
requesting the President to give notice of the abrogation of Article III. of 
the treaty with Great Britain of October 20, 1818, relating to Oregon. (G. 
28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 121.) 

January 10. — Votes against a motion to postpone indefinitely the bill 
to settle the title to Pea Patch Island. Participates in the discussion on the 
bill. (G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 125.) 

January 15. — Presents a memorial for postage reduction ; also a memorial 
of Peter S. V. Hamot, for refund of a sum of money paid by him on account 
of forfeiture of bail given by him. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 143.) 

January i6. — Presents a memorial for a dry-dock at Philadelphia (G 
28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 148.) 

January 18. — Presents a memorial for amending the Constitution so as 
expressly to acknowledge Divine Providence, and for the repeal of laws 



G.= Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



cxii THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

authorizing the running of mail-stages on Sunday. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, 
XIII. 158.) 

Remarks on a resolution to postpone indefinitely a bill to reduce the 
tariff. (Id. 161, Appendix, 106.) 

January 22. — Presents and comments upon a memorial for a new cus- 
tom-house at Philadelphia ; also a memorial of Count de Grasse for assist- 
ance. (G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 171.) 

January 23. — Votes against printing the resolutions of the Massachusetts 
Legislature favoring an amendment to the Constitution, allowing only free 
persons to be represented in Congress. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 176.) 

January 24. — Presents a memorial for the completion of the works in 
Erie Harbor. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 181.) 

January 25. — Remarks on the resolution for the abrogation of Article 
III. of the treaty with Great Britain of October 20, 1818, relating to Oregon. 
(G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844. XIII. 191.) 

January 29. — Presents a memorial for postage reduction. (G. 28 C. i s. 
1843-1844, XIII. 199.) 

January 30. — Presents memorials for the payment of certain cancelled 
Treasury notes; remarks on the subject. Presents a memorial from the 
heirs of David Noble, for commutation pay ; and a memorial relating to the 
application of customs laws to canal-boats passing through the New Jersey 
canal line with coal. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 206.) 

January 31. — Presents a memorial for the completion of the works in 
Erie Harbor. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 211.) 

February 5. — Presents a memorial for the exemption of railroad iron 
from duty; also a memorial for the exemption of canal-boats from the law 
regulating the issue of coasting licenses ; and a memorial for the reduction 
of postage. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 226.) 

February 7. — Presents memorials remonstrating against the admission 
of Texas, relating to the claim of William D. McMurtrie, and concerning 
the claim of the heirs of James Vanuxem on account of French depredations 
prior to 1800. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 238.) 

February 8. — Presents a memorial for the completion of the works in 
Erie Harbor. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 244.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to postpone the previous orders of the day 
for the purpose of taking up the bill to refund General Jackson's fine. 
(Id. 245.) 

February 13. — Votes against an amendment to the foregoing bill. (G. 
28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 269.) 

February 14. — Presents a memorial for a dry-dock at Philadelphia ; also 
a memorial of Robert McGuire for compensation for injuries sustained while 
a captive of the Indians during the war. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 273.) 

Votes in favor of a third reading of the bill to refund General Jackson's 
fine. It was so ordered. (Id. 274.) 

February 15. — Votes against a motion to lay on the table a bill for the 
repair of Pennsylvania Avenue. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for 
a third reading. (G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 282.) 

February 16. — Presents a memorial for a pension for the widow of 
Captain David Porter ; also a memorial for exempting canal-boats employed 
in the coal trade from paying for coasting licenses. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843- 
1844, XIII. 285.) 

February 17. — Remarks on a bill authorizing the transfer of appropria- 
tions in the naval service for certain purposes. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, 
XIII., Appendix, 238.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1844 cxiii 

February 19.— Presents a memorial from Benjamin B. Ferguson for a 
pension; also a petition for the payment of the claim of John Houston, a 
Revolutionary surgeon; also a memorial for exempting canal-boats employed 
in the coal trade from coasting licenses; and a memorial for a custom-house 
at Philadelphia. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 291, 291-292.) 

Remarks on a bill to purchase copies of a history of Oregon, California, 

etc. (Id. 293.) 

February 20.— Calls for the reading of the bill to extend the charters 
of the District banks. Remarks on the bill; motion to recommit it, with 
instructions to add a provision rendering the stockholders liable for all 
their issues. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 297.) 

Remarks on a bill for the purchase of copies of a history of Oregon, 
California, etc. (Id. 298.) 

Votes aye on the passage of the bill for repairing Pennsylvania Avenue. 

(Id. 298.) 

Remarks on a bill making compensation to pension agents. (Id. 298, 299.) 
Votes in favor of several amendments. (Id. 299.) Votes against ordering 
the bill to a third reading. (Id. 300.) 

February 22.— Remarks on a resolution calling for a copy of the pro- 
ceedings of the court of inquiry in the case of Alexander SHdell Mackenzie. 
(G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 305-) 

February 23.— Remarks on a resolution calling for the correspondence 
relating to the interpretation of Article X. of the Webster-Ashburton Treaty. 
(G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844- XIII. 311) 

Remarks on a resolution for the abrogation of Article III. of the treaty 
of October 20, 1818, with Great Britain. (Id. 314.) 

February 26. — Presents documents relating to the claim of the repre- 
sentatives of John Houston. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 319.) 

* February 27.— Presents a memorial against the repeal of the duty on 
railroad iron. Remarks on the subject. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 326.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of a bill authorizing the transfer to Mary- 
land of stock held by the United States in the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal. 
(Id. 327.) 

Remarks on the resolution for the abrogation of Article III. of the 
treaty of 1818 with Great Britain. (Id. 328.) 

*• March 4.— Remarks on the death of Mr. Frick. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843- 

1844, XIII. 338-339.) 

March 5. — Presents a memorial for the repair of the piers at Port Penn ; 
also a memorial for the re-enactment of the Pension Law of March, 1837. 
(G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 339) 

Votes on several amendments to the bill for the relief of certain con- 
tractors with the Government. (Id. 342.) 

March 6.— Remarks on the bill for the settlement of Oregon Territory. 
(G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 347.) 

March 7. — Moves postponement of the resolution for the abrogation of 
Article III. of the treaty of 1818 with Great Britain. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843- 

1844, XIII. 355-) 

March 8. — Presents a memorial against the alteration of the tariff of 

1842. (G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 358.) 

March 11. — Remarks on a motion to adjourn. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, 
XIII. 366.) 

* March 12. — Speech on the resolution for the abrogation of Article III. 
of the treaty of 1818 with Great Britain. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XII. 369- 
373, Appendix, 345-350.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 
viii 



exiv THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

March 13.— Presents memorials against any alteration of the tariff of 
1842; also a memorial for the repair of the piers at Port Penn. 

♦Presents a memorial on religious matters; rem.arks thereon. (G. 28 C. 

I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 376.) 

Moves for leave to withdraw the petition of G. T. Byer, which was 

agreed to. (Id. 376.) 

March 15. — Votes in favor of several amendments to the bill for the 
improvement of the Fox and Wisconsin rivers. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, 

XIII. 389, 390.} 

Votes against laying on the table a bill to repeal certain sections of the 
Distribution Act. (Id. 391.) 

March 18. — Presents a petition from the widow of Condy Raguet for 
compensation for diplomatic services rendered by her husband as consul 
and charge in Brazil ; also a petition against any alteration of the tariff of 
1842. (G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 394.) 

* Remarks on the resolution for the abrogation of Article III. of the 
treaty of 1818 with Great Britain. (Id. 396, 398-399.) 

* March 19. — Remarks on the foregoing resolution. (G. 28 C. i s. 

1843-1844, XIII. 407-) 

Presents the memorial of James P. Espy concerning an invention. (Id. 
404.) 

* March 20. — Remarks on the resolution for the abrogation of Article 
III. of the treaty of 1818 with Great Britain. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 
411-413, 413-414, Appendix, 350-3S2.) 

March 21. — Presents memorials against the alteration of the tariff of 
1842; also a memorial of W. B. Vaughan for an extension of time to com- 
plete his contract with the Government ; and memorials for the abolition of 
slavery. (G. 28 C. l s. 1843-1844, XIII. 415-416.) 

Votes in favor of adopting the resolution for the abrogation of Article 
III. of the treaty of 1818 with Great Britain. (Id. 418, Appendix, 310.) 

March 22. — Presents memorials against any alteration of the tariff of 
1842. (G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 421.) 

Votes against an amendment to the Pension Bill. (Id. 421.) 

* Remarks on the bill for the reduction of postage and the limiting of 
the franking privilege. (Id. 423.) 

March 26. — Presents a number of memorials on different subjects. (G. 
28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 436.) 

March 29. — Presents a memorial against any alteration of the tariff ; also 
a memorial in favor of the annexation of Texas. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, 

XIII. 457.) 

Presents a memorial of T. and J. W. Johnson offering for sale copies 
of laws of the United States. (Id. 459.) 

April I. — Presents a memorial of J. Sellers and Abm. L. Pennock con- 
cerning a claim for bags furnished to the Post Office Department ; also memo- 
rials against any alteration of the tariff of 1842. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, 
XIII. 465.) 

April 2. — Participates in the discussion on a motion to refer a bill for 
the establishment of a new collection district in Florida. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843- 
1844, XIII. 469.) 

April 3. — Presents memorials against any alteration of the tariff; also a 
memorial on religious matters. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 473-) 

* Remarks on a bill for the support of the Military Academy at West 
Point. Votes in favor of the passage of the bill. (Id. 474-) 



G.=Congressional Globe. — C.=Congress. — s.=session. — *=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1844 cxv 

Votes against an amendment to the Fortifications Appropriation Bill. 

(Id. 474.) 

* Remarks on a bill for the continuation of the Cumberland Road in 
Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. (Id. 475.) 

April 4. — Presents memorials against any alteration of the tariff ; also a 
petition of Eliza M. Cloud for a pension. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 

478.) 

April 5. — Presents a memorial against any alteration of the tariff ; also 
a memorial against the annexation of Texas. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, 
XIII. 482.) 

* Remarks on a bill to indemnify naval officers and seamen for property 
lost in wrecks. (Id. 483-484.) 

Remarks on an amendment to the Cumberland Road Bill. (Id. 484.) 

April 9. — Presents memorials against alteration of the tariff ; also a 
memorial for the erection of a monument to the memory of certain soldiers 
who fought at the Brandywine in 1777. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII, 491.) 

April 10. — Presents memorials against alteration of the tariff of 1842. 
(G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 498.) 

April II. — Presents a memorial for reduction of the duty on sugar; 
also memorials against alteration of the tariff; and a memorial for restoring 
four companies of artillery in service to the peace establishment of 100 men. 
(G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 505.) 

Votes in favor of a substitute for a bill to establish a naval depot at 
or adjacent to Memphis, providing for an investigation and report on certain 
other places. (Id. 508.) 

April 12. — Presents a memorial against any alteration of the tariff. (G. 
28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 510.) 

Votes against the passage of the bill for establishing a naval depot at 
Memphis. (Id. 511.) 

April 15. — Presents a memorial for the reduction of postage; also memo- 
rials against change in the tariff ; and a memorial against the annexation of 
Texas. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 515.) 

April 16. — Remarks on a motion to postpone indefinitely a bill for the 
reduction of postage and the limiting of the franking privilege. (G. 28 C. 
I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 522.) . _ 

April 17. — Presents a memorial for the abolition of slavery and against 
the annexation of Texas. (G. 28 C. 1 s. 1843-1844, XIII. 524.) 

* Remarks on the bill for the reduction of postage and the limiting of 
the franking privilege. (Id. 525, 526.) Votes against a motion to strike 
out the 9th section, which substitutes a given number of free stamps for 
the franking privilege. (Id. 526.) 

* April 18. — Remarks on a bill to purchase copies of Greenhow's History 
of Oregon. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. S31-532.) Votes in favor of 
engrossing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 532.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill to reduce postage. Remarks on 
an amendment to limit the force of the bill. (Id. 533.) 

April 19. — Presents a memorial against the annexation of Texas ; also 
the proceedings of a meeting opposed to any alteration of the tariff of 1842. 
(G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 536.) 

Remarks on the question of taking up the bill to reduce postage. (Id. 
537.) Further remarks. Votes against a motion to take up the bill. (Id. 
537.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to take up a resolution to postpone indefinitely 
the bill in relation to the tariff. (Id. 537.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



cxvi THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

April 22. — Presents memorials and resolutions for and against the annex- 
ation of Texas ; also memorials against any alteration of the tariff of 1842. 
(G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844. XIII. 542.) 

April 23. — Presents a memorial against the annexation of Texas. (G. 
28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 546.) 

Remarks on several amendments to the bill to reduce postage. (Id. 

547, 548.) 

April 24. — Presents memorials against any change in the tariff of 1842. 
(G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 554) 

* Remarks on the bill to reduce postage. Votes on several amendments. 
(Id. 554, SSS.) Further remarks on the bill. Votes in favor of engrossing 
the bill for a third reading. (Id. 556.) 

April 29. — Presents a memorial for the redemption of certain cancelled 
Treasury notes. Moves leave to withdraw the petition of Mrs. Agnes Slack. 
(G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844. XIII. 562.) 

Votes in favor of the bill to reduce postage and limit the franking 
privilege. (Id. 562.) 

April 30. — Remarks on a resolution to inquire into the right of John M. 
Niles to a seat as a Senator from Connecticut. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, 
XIII. 565.) 

May I. — Presents memorials for and against the annexation of Texas. 
(G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 569.) 

* May 8. — Remarks on the bill to extend the charters of the District 
banks. Votes against an amendment. Offers an amendment (to an amend- 
ment) requiring the keeping of a list of stockholders for public inspection 
and publication ; amendment adopted. Votes in favor of the original amend- 
ment. (G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 585, 586.) 

May 9. — Presents memorials in favor of the annexation of Texas. (G. 
28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 588.) 

May 13. — Presents a memorial for the annexation of Texas. (G. 28 C. 
I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 592.) 

Moves an amendment to the bill to extend the charters of the District 
banks in regard to the choice of trustees in case of failure. Remarks on 
the amendment, which was adopted. (Id. 593.) Votes in favor of concurring 
in the amendments of the Committee of the Whole. Votes in favor of the 
passage of the bill. (Id. 593.) 

May 14. — Remarks on a resolution fixing the day of adjournment. (G. 
28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 597.) 

May 15. — Presents the proceedings of a meeting in favor of the annexa- 
tion of Texas. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 598.) 

Remarks on the bill for the relief of the directors of the New England 
Mississippi Land Company. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third 
reading. (Id. 599.) 

May 16. — Presents a memorial against the annexation of Texas. (G. 
28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 602.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill for the relief of the directors 
of the New England Mississippi Land Company. (Id. 603.) 

May 17. — Votes against laying on the table a resolution fixing the day 
of adjournment. (G. 28 C. 1 s. 1843-1844, XIII. 607.) 

May 18. — Presents the memorial of John Shaw concerning his invention 
of a percussion cap for cannon and small arms ; also a memorial for the 
annexation of Texas. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 608.) 

May 21. — Presents a memorial for a law fixing one day for the election 
of President and Vice-President. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 611.) 



G.=ConErressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*= Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1844 cxvii 

May 22. — Votes against a motion to postpone indefinitely a bill regu- 
lating the pay of the Army. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 615.) 

May 23.— Remarks with reference to the bill for the payment of redeemed 
Treasury notes afterwards stolen. (G. 28 C. 1 s. 1843-1844, XIII. 617.) 

May 24. — Votes in favor of a resolution requesting the return from the 
House to the Senate of the bill regulating the pay of the Army. (G. 28 C. 
I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 619.) 

May 25. — Presents memorials for the annexation of Texas. (G. 28 C. 
I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 622.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to postpone the resolution fixing a day for 
adjournment. (Id. 623.) 

May 28. — Presents a petition against the annexation of Texas; also a 
petition for the restoration of certain companies of horse artillery to their 
standard prior to 1842; and memorials of Alice Pew and Sarah Scales for 
pensions. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 628.) 

Votes against an amendment to the Naval Pension Bill. (Id. 628.) 

Remarks on the bill relating to certain collection districts. (Id. 628, 

629.) 

Votes against an amendment to a bill for the relief of the heirs of 
Robert Fulton. (Id. 629.) 

May 29. — Presents a memorial for the annexation of Texas. (G. 28 C. 
I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 630.) 

Votes against a motion to recommit a bill authorizing the opening of a 
canal around the Falls of St. Mary. Votes in favor of the passage of the 
bill. (Id. 630.) 

May 31. — Votes against an amendment to the resolution to postpone 
indefinitely the bill for restoring the tarifif to the standard of the Compromise 
Act. Votes in favor of the resolution. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 633.) 

* June I. — Presents a memorial for the alteration of the naturalization 
laws. Remarks on the subject. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 634-635.) _ 

Remarks with reference to a bill making appropriations for certain 
Western harbors and rivers. Votes in favor of the passage of the bill. 

(Id. 635.) 

Votes in favor of an amendment to a bill making appropriations for 
certain Eastern harbors and rivers. Moves an amendment, and remarks 
thereon, to appropriate $500 for the repairs at the Marcus Hook pier ; amend- 
ment rejected. Votes in favor of the passage of the bill. (Id. 635.) 

June 3. — Presents a memorial for the alteration of the naturalization 
laws. (G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 636.) 

Remarks on a motion to lay on the table a memorial from the Society 
of Friends on the subject of slavery. (Id. 637.) Votes against the motion. 
(Id. 638.) 

Remarks on an amendment to the bill to adjust the title to Pea Patch 
Island. (Id. 638.) 

Remarks with reference to the petition of A. H. Johnson. (Id. 638.) 

Participates in the discussion on the claim of James Reeside. (Id. 638.) 

June 5. — Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading the bill to 
adjust the title to Pea Patch Island. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 643.) 

Jtme 6. — Votes in favor of laying on the table the question of the recep- 
tion of a memorial remonstrating against the annexation of Texas. Votes 
in favor of the reception of the memorial. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 

647-) 

June 8. — Presents memorials for the alteration of the naturalization 

laws ; also the proceedings of a meeting adverse to the annexation of Texas ; 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress. — s.=session. — *=Printecl herein. 



cxviii THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN • 

and memorials of Anne Houston and Elizabeth Smith for pensions. (G. 
28 C I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 651.) 

* Speech on the treaty for the annexation of Texas. (Id. Appendix, 

720-727.) 

Votes in favor of advising and consenting to its ratification. (Id. 652.) 

June II.— Presents memorials for the alteration of the naturalization 

laws; also a memorial for the ratification of the treaty for annexing Texas, 

or for the admission of Texas as a Territory. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, 

XIII. 658.) 

Remarks on memorials for the alteration of the naturalization laws. 

(Id. 658, 659.) 

Offers a resolution, which was adopted, for inquiring into the expediency 
of purchasing a certain banking-house in Philadelphia for a custom-house. 
(Id. 660.) 

Votes against a motion to lay on the table a joint resolution for the 
annexation of Texas. (Id. 661.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to lay on the table a bill providing for the 
remission of duties on railroad iron. (Id. 661.) 

* Remarks on the bill. (Id. 661, Appendix, 680-682.) 

Votes against engrossing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 662.) 

June 12. — Remarks on the period of the session left for the transaction 
of business. Votes against an amendment to the joint resolution for the 
relief of certain claimants under the Cherokee treaty of 1836. (G. 28 C. i s. 
1843-1844, XIII. 668, 669.) 

Remarks on the despatch of business before the Senate. Participates 
in the debate on the Reeside Claim Bill. Votes against an amendment. 
(Id. 669.) 

June 13. — Remarks on a bill for the relief of George Wentling. (G. 
28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 672.) 

Votes against a motion to lay on the table a bill for the annexation of 
Texas. (Id. 673.) 

Remarks on a provision in the General Appropriation Bill for the pay- 
ment of Jeremiah Smith. (Id. 673.) 

Votes against a motion to strike out from the General Appropriation 
Bill the provision for the salary of the charge to Sardinia. Remarks and 
votes on several amendments. (Id. 674.) 

Moves an amendment to appropriate $6,000 for the outfit of David Porter, 
late minister to Turkey; remarks on the subject; the amendment was 
adopted. (Id. 675.) 

Moves adjournment, which was not agreed to. Remarks on the bill for 
the remission of the duties on railroad iron. (Id. 675.) 

June 14. — Presents a memorial for the reform of the naturalization laws. 
(G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844. XIII. 678.) 

Votes against laying on the table the resolution of inquiry about certain 
acts of Great Britain. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, XIII. 678.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to take up a bill fixing the same day through- 
out the United States for the choice of Presidential electors. (Id. 679.) 

* Remarks on the bill. Votes against a motion to lay the bill on the 
table. (Id. 680.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to strike out from the Naval Appropriation 
Bill the section abolishing spirit rations. (Id. 682.) Participates in the 
debate on an amendment. (Id. 682.) 

Votes against an amendment to a bill making appropriations for certain 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1844 cxix 

objects of expenditure therein named, in the year ending June 30, 1844. 
Votes in favor of the passage of the bill. (Id. 683.) 

Remarks on and votes against a motion to take up the question of recon- 
sidering the vote refusing to order the bill for the remission of duties on 
railroad iron to be engrossed. (Id. 683.) Votes against the motion to 
reconsider the vote. (Id. 683.) Remarks on the bill. Votes in favor of a 
motion to lay the whole subject on the table. Votes in favor of a motion to 
postpone the subject. Votes in favor of a motion to postpone the bill 
indefinitely. (Id. 684.) 

June 15. — Remarks on the order of business. (G. 28 C. i s. 1843-1844, 
XIII. 688.) 

* Remarks on a report of the Committee on Retrenchment. (Id. 689.) 

June 17. — Presents a memorial relative to the reform of the naturaliza- 
tion laws. (G. 28 C. I s. 1843-1844, XIII. 695.) 

December 2. — Appears as a Senator from Pennsylvania. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 

1844-1845, XIV. I.) 

December 4. — Presents the credentials of Senator Ashley, of Arkansas. 
(G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 8.) 

December 9.^0n the announcement of the standing committees, appears 
as a member of the Committee on Foreign Relations and of the Committee 
on Manufactures. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845. XIV. 12: S. Doc. 2, 28 C. 2 s.) 

Presents memorials for the repair of the piers at Port Penn and for the 
completion of the light-house on the Brandywine shoals. (Id. 12.) 

Moves for leave to withdraw from the files the papers in the case of 
Joshua Shaw, which was agreed to. (Id. 12.) 

December 11. — Presents a petition of the executrix of James Reeside for 
the payment of the claim against the Post Office Department. Remarks on 
the claim. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845. XIV. 19.) 

December 12. — Presents a petition for the repair of the piers at Port 
Penn and for the completion of the light-house on the Brandywine shoals. 
(G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 24.) 

December 17. — Presents a memorial for the repair of the piers at Port 
Penn and for the completion of the light-house on the Brandywine shoals ; 
also additional testimony in support of the claim of Joshua Shaw. 

* Presents a memorial, and makes remarks thereon, to extend the period 
of required residence before naturalization to 21 years. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844- 

1845, XIV. 2,7.) 

December 19. — Presents a memorial from the Philadelphia and Reading 
Railway Company for the remission of the duties on imported railroad iron ; 
also a memorial of the widow of Enoch Edwards for commutation pay ; and 
a memorial for the repair of the piers at Port Penn and for the completion 
of the light-house on the Brandywine shoals. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, 
XIV. 48.) 

Votes in favor of a motion to refer the bill to organize the government 
of Oregon to the Committee on Territories. (Id. 48.) 

* Remarks on the question of reference. (Id. 49, Appendix, 46.) 
Votes against a motion to refer it to the Committee on Foreign Relations. 

(Id. 49, Appendix, 50.) 

December 30. — Presents memorials on the subject of naturalization, and 
for the admission of Texas, and the continuation of the tariff of 1842 ; also 
a memorial for the construction of a canal around the Falls of St. Mary ; 
also a memorial for a constitutional amendment to prevent governmental 
interference with slavery. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. y2>) 

December 31. — Presents a memorial for the abolition of slavery and 
against the annexation of Texas. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 75.) 



G.=Congressional Globe. — C.=Congress. — s.=session. — *=Printed herein. 



cxx 



THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 



SENATE (Concluded), 1845- 
January 2, 1845.— Presents memorials for the abolition of slavery. (G. 

28 C. 2 S. 1844-1845, XIV. 78.) . , , . .Tj ^ 

Remarks on a bill for the settlement of the Reeside claim, (id. 79.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill granting lands to Indiana to 
complete the Wabash and Erie Canal. (Id. 80.) 

January 6.— Presents a memorial for the proper organization of Oregon 
Territory; also a memorial for the improvement of the Mississippi and 
tributary rivers. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 93.) 

Remarks on a bill increasing the pay of certain officers of revenue- 
cutters. (Id. 93.) . . 

January 7.— Remarks on a resolution to prohibit the issuing of grants 
of certain lands in Louisiana. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 99.) 

January 8.— Presents a memorial for the reduction of postage and the 
abrogation of the franking privilege. Remarks on the subject. (G. 28 C. 
2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 104.) 

January 9.— Moves reference of a memorial of Henry May, administrator 
of Wm. H. Slacum, which was agreed to. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 

115) 

Remarks on amendments to the bill for the establishment of the Smith- 
sonian Institution. (Id. 117.) 

January 13.— Moves reference of the petition of Eliza M. Cloud, which 
was agreed to. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 128.) 

Votes against a motion to recommit a bill for the relief of Miles King 
and his assigns. (Id. 129.) 

January 14. — Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading a bill 
renewing widows' pensions. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 134.) 

January 15. — Presents a memorial for postage reduction; also a memorial 
to extend to 21 years the period of required residence before naturalization. 
(G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845. XIV. 138.) 

Votes against engrossing for a third reading the bill increasing the pay 
of officers of revenue-cutters while temporarily employed in the naval 
service. (Id. 139.) 

Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading a bill for the relief 
of Asa Andrews. (Id. 139.) 

January 20. — Presents documents in support of the claim of William 
Fuller and Orlando Saltmarsh on the Post Office Department; also a peti- 
tion for an amendment of the naturalization laws ; and a petition as to the 
fitness of Hollidaysburg, Pennsylvania, as a site for a national armory. 
(G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845. XIV. 155.) 

Votes against engrossing for a third reading a bill to refund a balance 
due to Massachusetts. (Id. 156.) 

Remarks on a bill authorizing the making of permanent contracts for 
the transportation of mails upon railroads. (Id. 157.) 

* January 21. — Remarks on the bill for establishment of the Smithsonian 
Institution. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 162, 163-164.) 

January 22. — Votes in favor of the passage of the bill for the continua- 
tion of the Cumberland Road in Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 
1844-1845, XIV. 172.) 

Votes against the passage of the bill to refund a balance due to Massa- 
chusetts. (Id. 172.) 

Remarks on a bill for the relief of Joshua Shaw. Votes against a motion 
to recommit the bill. Votes in favor of the passage of the bill. (Id. 172.) 

G.=Cong:ressional Globe. — C.=Congress.— s.=session. — *= Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1845 cxxi 

January 27.— Presents a memorial for fixing a uniform postage on letters ; 
also a memorial against the annexation of Texas. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, 

XIV. 194.) . , • r T 

January 29.— Presents a memorial agamst the annexation ot lexas. 

(G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 211.) . 

* Remarks on a bill to reduce the postage and to limit the franking 

privilege. (Id. 214.) 

Votes against several amendments fixing the rates of postage. (.id. 

-^4. 215.) . , , . , , r M- 

February 3.— Presents a memorial as to the price and sale of public 

lands. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-184S, XIV. 233.) 

Votes against a motion on the bill to reduce postage, continuing the 
franking privilege of certain officials. Votes and speaks on several amend- 
ments. (Id. 234.) 

February 4.— Report by the Committee on Foreign Relations on reso- 
lutions against the annexation of Texas. 

* Remarks on the subject. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 240.) 
February 5.— Votes against a motion to refer a bill to provide for the 

annexation of Texas. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 248.) 

Remarks on the bill to reduce postage. (Id. 248.) 

February 6.— Remarks on his amendment to an amendment to the bill 
to reduce postage and limit the franking privilege. Amendment negatived. 
Votes against the original amendment. Votes in favor of striking out the 
gth section. Votes in favor of an amendment concerning newspapers. (G. 
28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 252, 253.) 

February 7.— Presents memorials against the annexation of Texas; also 
memorials for the abolition of slavery and for the colonizing of Pennsylva- 
nia negroes in Oregon Territory. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 256.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill to reduce postage. (Id. 257.) 
Participates in a debate on an amendment to the bill. (Id. 257.) 

February 8. — Presents a memorial against the annexation of Texas. 
(G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 260.) 

Votes in favor of the passage of the bill to reduce postage. (Id. 264.) 

February 10.— Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading the bill 
to provide for ascertaining the claims of American citizens for French spolia- 
tions prior to July 31, 1801. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 267.) 

Votes in favor of engrossing for a third reading a bill for a free bridge 
across the Eastern Branch of the Potomac. (Id. 267.) 

February 11.— Remarks on the question of postponing the consideration 
of the resolution against the annexation of Texas. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, 
XIV. 271.) 

Remarks on a bill for the purchase and distribution of the decisions of 
the United States Supreme Court. (Id. 271.) Votes against engrossing 
the bill for a third reading. (Id. 273.) 

Remarks on a bill authorizing the appointment of assistant surgeons 
and assistant pursers in the Navy. Votes against engrossing the bill for a 
third reading. (Id. 272.) 

February 13. — Presents a memorial for a change of post routes; also a 
memorial of William Carman for a pension. (G. 28 C. 2 s._ 1844-1845, XIV. 
278.) Presents a memorial of Enos Stephens concerning his invention of a 
machine for recording legislative votes. (Id. 278.) 

Votes against the passage of a bill for the purchase and distribution of 
the decisions of the Supreme Court. (Id. 278.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—*=Printed herein. 



cxxii THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 

Remarks with reference to the resolution against the annexation of 
Texas. Moves adjournment, which was agreed to. (Id. 281, 282.) 

February 14. — Speech on a proposition to postpone indefinitely the joint 
resolution for annexing Texas. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 287; Niles' 
Register, March i, 1845, LXVII. 405-409.) 

Votes against a motion to refer to the Judiciary Committee a bill for 
the admission of the States of Iowa and Florida. (Id. 287.) 

February 15. — Presents a memorial for the purchase and distribution of 
the reports of the Supreme Court. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 291.) 

Votes against a motion to postpone a resolution to fix an earlier hour of 
meeting. (Id. 292.) 

February 19. — Votes in favor of an amendment to the resolution fixing 
the daily hour of meeting of the Senate. Votes in favor of the resolution. 
(G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 308.) 

February 20. — Votes against a motion to reconsider the vote on the 
resolution providing for the daily hour of meeting. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844- 

1845, XIV. 3I4-) 

Votes in favor of a resolution providing that the special order, the 
resolution admitting Texas, shall be proceeded with until otherwise ordered. 

(Id- 3IS-) 

February 22. — Presents a memorial of John Hall for a pension. (G. 

28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 328.) 

February 24. — Votes in favor of the passage of a bill making appropria- 
tions for the Military Academy at West Point. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, 

XIV. 332.) 

February 26. — Remarks on the bill to allow certain railroad iron to be 
imported free of duty by Michigan and by certain railroad companies. (G. 
28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 350.) 

Votes against two separate motions to adjourn. Remarks on a further 
motion to adjourn. (Id. 352.) 

* February 27. — Remarks on an amendment to the General Appropria- 
tion Bill, to reduce the salaries of the ministers to Austria and Brazil. (G. 

28 C 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 357-) 

* Remarks on the joint resolution from the House for annexing Texas. 

(Id. 359-) 

Votes against an amendment for squatter sovereignty south of the 
Missouri Compromise line. Votes against an amendment stipulating that 
the public debt of Texas shall in no event become a charge upon the United 
States Government. Votes against a substitute. Votes in favor of an 
amendment providing for the admission of Texas as a State. (Id. 361, 362.) 
Votes against a further amendment. (Id. 361.) Remarks on the bill. (Id. 
361-362.) Votes against a motion to strike out the House resolution. Votes 
against several motions. Votes in favor of engrossing the bill for a third 
reading. (Id. 362.) 

February 28. — Votes in favor of a bill to enable the Chickasaw Indians 
to try their claims in United States courts. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 

365.) 

Remarks on the bill for the relief of Michigan and certain railroad 

companies. Votes against the bill. (Id. 365.) 

Remarks on an amendment to the General Appropriation Bill, pro- 
viding for compensation to J. Pemberton Hutchinson for diplomatic ser- 
vices. (Id. 367.) Remarks on an amendment as to computing the mileage 
of members of Congress. (Id. 367.) 



G.=CongressionaI Globe.— C.=Congress.—s.=session.—* = Printed herein. 



CAREER IN CONGRESS: SENATE, 1845 cxxiii 

Votes against an amendment to the Mexican Indemnities Bill. (Id. 
368.) Votes against the amendment on reconsideration. (Id. 369.) 

March i. — Votes in favor of a House amendment to the bill to reduce 
postage. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 376.) 

Votes in favor of laying on the table a resolution providing for the 
retention by the Secretary of the Treasury of moneys due to a State which 
may be in default for the payment of interest or principal on its stocks 
or bonds held by the United States. 

* Remarks on the resolution. Votes in favor of a motion 'to lay the 
resolution on the table. Votes against its engrossment for a third reading. 
(Id. 377.) 

Votes against an amendment to the bill for the admission of Florida and 
Iowa as States. Votes in favor of the passage of the bill. (Id. 383.) 

Marcli 3. — Votes in favor of a motion to postpone previous orders and 
take up the bill to organize a territorial government in Oregon. (G. 28 C. 
2 s. 1844-1845, XIV. 388.) 

Participates in a debate on the Indian Appropriation Bill. (Id. 389.) 
Votes against an amendment. Votes in favor of an amendment. (Id. 389.) 

Votes in favor of laying on the table a motion to print a report on 
naturalization frauds. Votes against a motion to print. (Id. 3S9, 390.) 

Remarks on the Navy Appropriation Bill. Votes against an amendment 
making an appropriation for the heirs of Robert Fulton. (Id. 390.) 

Votes in favor of an amendment to the Army Appropriation Bill, appro- 
priating $225,000 for the continuation of the Cumberland Road. Remarks 
on amendments to the bill. Votes in favor of an amendment making an 
appropriation for the improvement of the Ohio River. (Id. 391.) 

Remarks on a resolution for printing a report of Lieutenant Fremont's 
expedition over the Rocky Mountains. (Id. 391.) 

Votes in favor of the passage, over the President's veto, of a bill in 
relation to revenue cutters. (Id. 391.) 

Remarks on the bill for the improvement of harbors and rivers. (Id. 
391.) Votes against certain amendments. (Id. 391.) Votes against a 
motion to lay the bill on the table. (Id. 392.) Votes in favor of engross- 
ing the bill for a third reading. (Id. 393.) 

March 4. — Appears as a Senator from Pennsvlvania. (G. 28 C. 2 s. 
1844-1845, XIV. 397.) 



G.=Congressional Globe.— C.=Congress. — s.=session. — *=Pritited herein. 



The Works 



OF 



James Buchanan 



1813. 
TO JARED INGERSOLL.^ 

Lancaster 6th February 1813. 
Dear Sir 

Enclosed you will discover a letter of recommendation in 
my favor, Jas. Hopkins, Esq., of Lancaster. They contain a 
solicitation, that you would do me the honor of appointing me 
your Deputy in the county of Lebanon which has recently been 
struck off the counties of Dauphin & Lancaster, 

I should have procured letters from a greater number of 
persons had I not known it would only have been troubling 
you, without advancing my own interest. You are perfectly 
acquainted with how much facility numerous recommendations 
for almost any appointment can be obtained; I have therefore 
in addressing you been bold enough to come forward under the 
patronage of but two names. As they are perfectly acquainted 
with the qualifications necessary for the discharge of the duties 
of Deputy Attorney General, and as they have too much honor 
and integrity to deceive you by recommending an unworthy per- 
son : I feel confident that their solicitation will have more influence 
with you, than if my appointment had been asked by a much 
greater number of ordinary characters. 

If you think proper to honor me by giving me the appoint- 
ment, I shall feel proud to have obtained it from a gentleman 



* From the Buchanan Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania. Mr. 
Ingersoll, when this letter was written, was Attorney General of Pennsylvania. 
The text here given is taken from a draft, or a rough copy, in which, after 
the word " favor " in the second line, there are crossed out the following 
words — " the one from Mr. Hopkins, the other from Judge Franklin." 

1 



2 



THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN 



[1815 



of your distinction, & shall use every exertion to do my duty 
in such a manner as to merit your approbation. 

Without any desire to precipitate your decision, I should 
consider it a particular favor if you would be so good as to inform 
me the result of it, as soon as is convenient, after it is made. 
I hope you will not think this request presumptuous, when you 
are informed that I am a young man just about selecting a place 
of future settlement, & that your determination will have a 
considerable influence upon my choice. 

I am with great esteem your[s] sincerely 

James Buchanan. 
Jared Ingersoll Esquire. 



Uj 



<s. 



1815. 
FOURTH OF JULY ORATION.^ 

AN OR.\TION, 

Delivered before the Washington Association of Lancaster, on the 
fourth of July, 1815, by James Buchanan, Esq., and published at the request 
of the Standing Committee. 

(Concluded.) 

They began with the destruction of the navy. It had been 
supposed by the federal administrations, that a navy was our 
best defence. From the locality of our country, and from the 
nature of such a force, they knew that it would be peculiarly cal- 
culated to protect our shores from foreign invasion, and to make 
us respected by the nations of the world ; without, like a standing 
army, endangering our liberties. It was also foreseen by them, 
that without a navy, our commerce would be exposed, as a rich 
temptation, to the avarice of all nations ; and in consequence of 
our own weakness, we would be subjected to constant insults and 

^The editor has been unable to find a complete copy of this oration. 
It was published in the Lancaster Journal of July 21 and July 28, 181 5. A 
search in Lancaster and elsewhere has failed to discover a copy of the issue 
of July 21, containing the opening part of the speech. A copy of the issue 
of July 28, containing the conclusion, which is here reproduced, is preserved 
in the rooms of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, at Philadelphia. 
The effect of Mr. Buchanan's Federalist antecedents is clearly displayed in 
these early utterances. For his own comments upon them, see his sketch 
of the early part of his life, which is given in the last volume of this 
publication. 



1815] FOURTH OF JULY ORATION 3 

injuries upon the ocean, without the power of resistance. It 
had, therefore, been their policy, gradually to erect a navy, and 
they had built a great number of vessels at the time when the 
first democratic administration came into power. 

At that moment the scene changed. They had promised the 
people an exemption from taxes, and unless they could perform, 
their popularity was in danger. They did not hesitate what 
course to pursue. They immediately sold our national ships — 
they disarmed the country — left commerce unprotected and invited 
insult and injustice from abroad, that they might not be under 
the necessity of imposing a trifling tax, and thereby injuring their 
popularity at home. 

Thanks be to Providence the delusion upon this subject has 
vanished, and their conduct now appears in its proper light before 
the public. The little remnant of that navy, which had been 
fondly cherished by Washington and his adherents, but which 
was despised by the patriots of the present day, has risen trium- 
phant above its enemies at home, and has made the proud mistress 
of the ocean tremble. The people are now convinced that a navy 
is their best defence. 

The democratic administration next declared war against 
commerce. They were not satisfied with depriving it of the 
protection of a navy, but they acted as though they had deter- 
mined upon its annihilation. At a time, when the nations of 
Europe were convulsed by dreadful wars, the United States being 
neutral, and when, in consequence thereof, all our native pro- 
ductions were in the greatest demand, and the carrying trade 
presented to our merchants a rich harvest in every quarter of the 
globe, they shut up our ports by embargoes and non-importation 
laws. By these means, the streams of wealth, which were flowing 
into our national treasury and into our country, from the thousand 
fountains of commerce, were suddenly dried up. These acts of 
parricide gave an instantaneous and a dreadful blow to our 
prosperity. The voice of business was no longer heard in our 
cities. The stillness of death pervaded every street. Dejection 
and despair sat upon each man's countenance. The newspapers 
of the day, instead of being filled with arrivals from abroad, and 
sales of merchandize, teemed with bankruptcies. And our ships 
were laid up to rot, as melancholy monuments of the weak and 
wicked policy of our government. 

Who that has witnessed these things, cannot observe the hand 
of the Corsican despot, like that dreadful hand upon the wall of 



4 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1815 

the Babylonish monarch, writing our destruction. Who can 
avoid beheving that Bonaparte was the source of this pohcy, and 
that it was intended to operate in unison with his continental 
system. It might perhaps be unwarrantable to assert, that our 
administration were actually corrupted by France ; but that their 
politics were biassed by a warm and improper partiality for that 
country, there can be no doubt. 

Time will not allow me to enumerate all the wild and wicked 
projects of the democratic administrations. Suffice it to say, that 
after they had deprived us of the means of defence, by destroying 
our navy and disbanding our army; after they had taken away 
from us the power of re-creating them, by ruining commerce, the 
great source of our national and individual wealth ; after they 
had, by refusing the Bank of the United States a continuation 
of their charter, embarrassed the financial concerns of the govern- 
ment, and withdrawn the only universal paper medium of the 
country from circulation; after the people had become unaccus- 
tomed to, and of course, unwilling to bear, taxation ; and without 
money in the Treasury, they rashly plunged us into a war with a 
nation more able to do us injury than any other in the world. 
What was the dreadful necessity for this desperate measure? 
Was our country invaded? No. Were our liberties in danger? 
No. Was it to protect our little remaining commerce from the 
injuries it sustained by the orders in council? No. Commerce 
was not such a favorite, and the merchants wished for no war on 
that account. Besides, if the existence of the orders in council 
had been its true cause, after their repeal, our country would have 
accepted the olive branch which was offered by England. What 
then was the cause? The one for which we professed to draw 
the sword and risk our all, was to determine an abstract question 
of the law of nations, concerning which, an opinion different from 
that of our administration, was held by all Europe. To decide 
whether a man can expatriate himself or not. In the decision of 
this question our administration pretended to feel a deep interest. 
The greater part of those foreigners, who would be affected by it, 
had long been their warmest friends. They had been one of the 
great means of elevating the present ruling party, and it would 
have been ungrateful for that party to have abandoned them. 

Superficial observers may suppose this to have been the real 
source of the war; but whoever will carefully and impartially 
examine the history of our country, will find its true origin to 
have been far different. It took its rise from the over-weaning 



1815] FOURTH OF JULY ORATION 5 

partiality which the democratic party have uniformly shown for 
France, and the consequent hatred which they felt against her 
great adversary, England. To keep this foreign feeling alive, 
has been the labour of their leaders for more than twenty years ; 
and well have they been repaid for their trouble, for it has been 
one of the principal causes of introducing and continuing them 
in power. Immediately before the war, this foreign influence 
had completely embodied itself with every political feeling of a 
majority of the people, particularly in the west. Its voice was 
heard so loud at the seat of government, that the President was 
obliged either to yield to its dictates, or to retire from office. 
The choice in this alternative was easily made by a man, who 
preferred his private interest to the public good. We were, there- 
fore, hurried into the war utterly unprepared. 

What has been its result? Exactly what every reasonable 
man expected at its commencement. We declared our intention 
of conquering Canada; whether for the purpose of annexing it 
to the United States, or of compelling our enemy to yield the doc- 
trine of impressment, is immaterial to the present question. In- 
stead of conquering it, we have ourselves been invaded in every 
quarter, and the best blood of the country has streamed in defence 
of our own soil. The very capitol of the United States, the lofty 
temple of liberty, which was reared and consecrated by Washing- 
ton, has been abandoned to its fate by his degenerate successor, 
who ought to have shed his last drop of blood in its defence. 

After the administration had entered upon the war, instead 
of coming forward, with manly confidence, and taxing the people 
for its support, they basely shrunk from their duty, in order to 
maintain their popularity, and adopted the ruinous system of 
carrying on the contest by borrowing money. What were the 
effects of this policy? Does not every man in the country know, 
was it even disguised by the administration, that the United 
States would, in a short time, have become bankrupt, had not a 
peace been concluded? Thanks then to Heaven, that we have 
obtained a peace, bad and disgraceful as it is; otherwise, the 
beautiful structure of the federal government, supported by the 
same feeble hands, might have sunk, like the capitol, into ruins. 

This system of anticipating our revenue has left an immense 
load of debt upon the country, the payment of which will be a 
grievous burden, not only upon the present generation, but upon 
posterity. This burden has fallen more heavily upon our county, 
than upon any other part of the union ; on account of our numer- 



6 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1815 

ous and extensive distilleries. The late additional duty imposed 
upon whiskey has almost destroyed its manufacture. In its con- 
sequences, it has not only affected the distillers, but it has given 
a severe blow to the prosperity of this county generally. Whilst 
the distilleries were in active operation, the cattle and the grain 
of the farmer always found a good and a ready market at home. 
The balance of trade was greatly in our favor, and wealth was 
rapidly diffusing itself throughout our county. But Congress, 
by imposing a tax upon the article more grievous than it was able 
to bear, have not only blighted our prosperity, but have destroyed 
the very revenue which they intended to raise. This instance, 
among many others of a similar nature, shows how totally desti- 
tute are our present rulers of wisdom and foresight, even upon 
subjects immediately regarding the pecuniary interest of the 
government. 

These are not the only evils consequent upon that timid and 
time-serving policy. It has embarrassed the government so much, 
that it must be a long time indeed, before we can dare again to go 
to war with any powerful nation, even for the maintenance of our 
dearest rights. All these evils would, in a great measure, have 
been prevented by sufficient independence in the administration, to 
have imposed moderate taxes at the commencement of the contest. 
The credit of the nation would then have continued good, and we 
might have avoided the painful spectacle of seeing the public stock 
sold in the market, at an enormous discount, and greedy specula- 
tors enriching themselves by its purchase, at the expense of the 
toil and sweat of the honest yeomanry of our country. 

Instead of exempting seamen sailing under our flag from 
impressment by the war, we have altogether relinquished that 
principle: because it is a w^ell established truth in the law of 
nations, that if war be waged by one country against another for 
a specified claim, and the treaty which terminates the contest, is 
silent upon that subject, it is forever abandoned. Thus the gov- 
ernment have at last yielded the very point for the maintenance 
of which they professed to go to war, after having expended 
nearly $200,000,000. 

We have not only not obtained by the war any thing which 
we were taught to expect, but Ave have lost many valuable privi- 
leges. All the numerous rights and advantages guaranteed to us 
by Jay's treaty have been relinquished. Nay. we have not only 
been compelled to conclude a treaty which does not contain one 
solitary stipulation in our favor, except that there shall be peace; 



1815] FOURTH OF JULY ORATION 7 

but which unsettles the boundaries of our country, and leaves to 
the decision of commissioners, whether we shall longer retain 
a part of our own territory, which we have held in quiet posses- 
sion for more than twenty years. 

But notwithstanding our immense national debt, which, if 
the war had continued, would soon have resulted in national bank- 
ruptcy; notwithstanding all our property, even the very neces- 
saries of life have been taxed heavily ; notwithstanding we have 
not obtained a single object which we had in view at the com- 
mencement of the contest, but have lost many valuable privileges ; 
notwithstanding our country has been invaded in every quarter, 
and the capitol of the United States has been laid in ashes by a 
marauding party of the enemy; this has been called a glorious 
war. Glorious it has been, in the highest degree, to the American 
character; but disgraceful in the extreme to the administration. 
When the individual States discovered that they were abandoned 
by the general government, whose duty it was to protect them, the 
fortitude of their citizens arose with their misfortunes. The 
moment we were invaded, the genius of freedom inspired their 
souls. They rushed upon their enemies with a hallowed fury, 
which the hireling soldiers of Britain could never feel. They 
taught our foe, that the soil of freedom would always be the grave 
of its invaders. 

But do the administration, who involved us in the late 
unnecessary war, derive any credit from their exertions? Cer- 
tainly not. They were the spontaneous efforts of the country, 
undirected by the government. The militia who were chiefly 
engaged in these glorious conflicts, were often without pay and 
without comfortable clothing. The dreadful situation of the 
country compelled them to abandon their families and the sweets 
of domestic life, without any previous warning, to defend places 
which were left utterly unprotected by their proper guardians. 
Places which ought to have been ready for a siege, at the com- 
mencement of the contest. As well might Ferdinand the 7th 
of Spain, who was not in his kingdom, but who was nominally 
king, claim the glory of rescuing his country from the armies of 
France, as our government take to itself the credit of expelling 
our invaders. 

When we turn our attention to the regular army which were 
peculiarly under the direction of the national government, what 
do we discover? During the first year of the war, that year in 
which it was to have closed with glory, that year within which our 



8 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1815 

triumphant banners were to have floated upon the walls of Quebec, 
and all Canada was to have been ours, the year in which that 
province was left unprotected, and the forces of our enemy were 
employed in Europe, it experienced nothing but a continuation 
of degradation and defeat. Is there an American on the floor 
of this house, who has not blushed for his country a thousand 
times, during that disgraceful year. Until all the general officers 
who had been appointed for political purposes, and intrusted with 
the command at the commencement of the contest, were dis- 
graced; and until others had fought themselves into credit and 
into notice, all our battles ended in defeat. 

During the last year of the war, the regular army, under 
their new commanders retrieved their lost character and per- 
formed prodigies of valor; but unfortunately, on account of the 
impotence of the government, they fought against such fearful 
odds, that they were hardly able even to defend our northern 
frontier. Indeed, so dreadful was the situation of our country, 
for some time previous to the close of the contest, that the 
occasional splendid exploits of our heroes, like the gleams of 
lightning in a dark and tempestuous night, only added new 
horrors to the surrounding gloom. They only served to shew 
us what brilliant exertions our country might have made, had 
we been governed by men who were capable of properly collect- 
ing and directing its resources. 

But peace has again returned to bless our shores. Again 
Commerce, who has for years been weeping over the misfortunes 
of our country, begins to smile. Again we stand neutral towards 
all the European powers. What then should be the political 
conduct of our country in future? Precisely to pursue the politi- 
cal maxims adopted by Washington. We ought to cultivate 
peace with all nations, by adopting a strict neutrality not only 
of conduct but of sentiment. We ought to make our neutrality 
respected, by placing ourselves in an attitude of defence. We 
ought forever to abandon the wild project of a philosophic vision- 
ary, of letting commerce protect itself. For its protection we 
ought to increase our navy. We ought never to think of embar- 
goes and non-intercourse laws without abhorrence. We ought 
to use every honest exertion to turn out of power those weak and 
wicked men, who have abandoned the political path marked out 
for this country by Washington, and whose wild and visionary 
theories have been at length tested by experience and found 
wanting. Above all, we ought to drive from our shores foreign 



1821] TO JUDGE FRANKLIN 9 

influence, and cherish exclusive American feeHngs. Foreign 
influence has been, in every age, the curse of Republics. Her 
jaundiced eye sees all things in false colours. The thick atmos- 
phere of prejudice, by which she is forever surrounded, excludes 
from her sight the light of reason. Whilst she worships the 
nation which she favours, for their very crimes, she curses the 
enemy of that nation even for their virtues. In every age she 
has marched before the enemies of her country, proclaiming peace 
when there was no peace, and lulling its defenders into false 
security, whilst the iron hand of despotism has been aiming a 
death-blow at their liberties. Already has our infant republic 
felt her withering influence. Already has she involved us in a 
war which had nearly cost us our existence. Let us then learn 
wisdom from experience, and forever banish this fiend from our 
society. We are separated from the nations of Europe by an 
immense ocean. We are still more disconnected from them, by 
a different form of government, and by the enjoyment of true 
liberty. Why then should we injure ourselves, by taking part in 
the ambitious contests of foreign despots and kings? 

Should this Washingtonian policy be pursued, our country 
will again rise to its former greatness and wealth. Under the 
blessing of Providence, we may then calculate on a long and a 
happy existence as a nation. We may reasonably hope that our 
children's children to remote generations may be assembled 
together upon this auspicious day, blessing the memories of the 
men whom Heaven entrusted with the glorious task, of making 
a great nation free, happy, and independent. 



182L 
TO JUDGE WALTER FRANKLIN/ 

Washington city 21 Dec. 1821. 
Dear Sir 

It was very gratifying to me, to have received a letter from 
you. I can with all my heart, reciprocate towards you the expres- 



^ From the Buchanan Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania. Judge 
Franklin, when impeached during the sessions of the Pennsylvania legis- 
lature of 1816-17 and 1817-18, was defended by Buchanan, who refers to the 
trials in his autobiographical sketch of his early life, given in the last volume 
of this publication. See, also, Curtis's Buchanan, I. 16. 



10 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1821 

sions of friendship which it contains, although the intervention 
of unfortunate circumstances, may have prevented me from enjoy- 
ing as much of the pleasure and profit of your society, as I could 
have desired ; yet my respect and friendship for you have been 
uniform and un variable. It was my intention, before I came to 
Washington, to send you all the public documents, which I 
thought would be interesting to you, and I shall continue to do 
so until the end of the Session. It is probable you may find them 
worth preserving, as it is now difficult even here to obtain those 
which were printed, but a few years ago. 

Upon becoming acquainted with the Members, and hearing 
several of them speak, I was forcibly struck with the idea that 
the reputation of many of them, stands higher than it deserves. 
Several gentlemen who appear to great advantage in the debates 
published, receive no attention from the Members, they speak for 
their constituents and not to enlighten their audience ; indeed this 
matter seems to be so perfectly understood, that they proceed 
with the most perfect deliberation and composure, although they 
must see and know that they are not able to command any atten- 
tion. With respect to many of them, if the members were even 
disposed to listen, they could not hear. It requires great compass 
of voice to fill the hall. It is a very magnificent and very elegant 
chamber, but unless a man has stentorian lungs, he cannot be 
heard distinctly. The voice of Mr. Coulden, for instance, whom 
you have no doubt heard speak, is so weak, that his usefulness, 
on that account, w^ill be in a great degree lost. 

Mr. Randolph's shrill, sharp, effeminate voice is eminently 
calculated for the chamber of the House of Representatives. He 
is indeed an extraordinary man, in his way. When he rises to 
speak, he commands the most profound attention. He is not very 
argumentative, but there is more severity and point, both in his 
matter and in his manner than can be conceived by any person, 
who has never had an opportunity of hearing him. He is perfect 
master of language, and always uses the very best word to convey 
his idea. It is said by those who are intimately acquainted with 
him that he is perfectly rational this zvinter; and from my own 
observation, I have no doubt that is the fact. He is great in 
demolishing, but not in building up, and I have little doubt, that 
if he now stood at the head of a powerful opposition, as he did 
in the days of John Adams, and had an opportunity of attacking 
such ruinous measures, as were then adopted, his character as a 
politician would be placed nearly on the same level which it then 



1822] SPEECH ON INDIAN APPROPRIATIONS 11 

occupied. At present it is said he is hostis humani generis, and 
attacks indiscriminately friend and foe. 

I have twice attempted to speak, and each time received a 
tolerable share of attention, which in a very great degree, I 
attributed to the curiosity of the Members, as on both occasions 
I felt myself much embarrassed. I am told, however, that I 
can be distinctly heard. 

The first business of general importance on which we shall 
act will be the Bankrupt bill. Upon this subject I have not yet 
made up my mind, and it would therefore afiford me much satis- 
faction to hear your opinion ; your memory can recall the effects 
of the last bill on society ; and as a politician I am not disposed 
readily to abandon the lessons of experience for any fanciful 
tlieories, however plausible. Whilst on the one hand, I would 
desire to relieve the many honest and unfortunate Individuals, 
who are now suffering under the pressure of debts, which they 
will never be able to discharge, on the other, I fear the pas- 
sage of a Bankrupt law might again encourage that spirit of 
unbounded speculation, which has occasioned the very evils it 
proposes to remedy. My mind is, however, wholly undetermined 
on the subject. 

I have at present nothing more to add than that I remain, 

Your sincere friend 

James Buchanan. 



1822. 

SPEECH, JANUARY 9, 1822, 

in the house of representatives, in committee of the whole, 
on a deficiency in the indian appropriations.^ 

Mr. Chairman : 

On Friday last, when the House adjourned, I did believe that 
the subject now before the Committee was involved in doubt and 
in mystery. I thought that a dark cloud hung over the transac- 
tion, which ought to be cleared up before the House could give 
its sanction to this appropriation. After a careful examination, 
the mystery has vanished — the cloud has been dispelled — and, to 
my view, the subject appears clear as the light of day. If it had 
not, my vote would be given against the appropriation ; because. 



^ Annals of Congress, 17 Cong, i Sess. 1821-1822, I. 682-690. 



12 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

in a Republican Government, doubt and mystery, in any measure 
proposed by the Executive Department, should always be sufficient 
to prevent it from receiving the support of the House. 

In the remarks which I propose to submit, it will be my 
endeavor to communicate to the Committee the reasons upon 
which I have come to the determination to give this appropriation 
my unqualified support. If I should be wrong, there are many 
gentlemen in the House whose judgment and whose experience 
will enable them to correct my errors. 

Nice distinctions have been drawn between a just confidence 
in the Executive Departments, and an unreasonable jealousy of 
their conduct on the one side; and, on the other, between that, 
confidence, and a belief in their infallibility. Extremes in such 
a case are very dangerous. Whilst unreasonable jealousy of men 
in power keeps the public mind in a state of constant agitation 
and alarm, a blind reliance upon their infallibility may enable 
them to destroy the liberties of the people before they are aware 
of the existence of the danger. At the same time, therefore, that 
I trust I am one of the last men in the House who would consent 
to establish the office of dictator in the Commonwealth, or to 
believe in the infallibility of mortals in politics more than in 
religion ; yet, I should think it wrong to withhold from a public 
officer that degree of confidence which assumes that he has acted 
correctly, until the contrary appears. It ought to be a maxim 
in politics, as well as in law, that an officer of your Government, 
high in the confidence of the people, shall be presumed to have 
done his duty, until the reverse of the proposition is proved. 

These observations are made, not because I believe they have 
any bearing upon the present question, but simply in answer to 
those used by gentlemen who have argued upon the opposite side. 
The Secretary of War. upon the present occasion, requires not 
the aid of presumptions in his favor, because, to my mind at least, 
there is the most full, satisfactory, and self-evident proof. 

Before I come to the principal question. Mr. Chairman, per- 
mit me to answer one of the arguments which has been eloquently 
and ingeniously urged by the gentlemen opposed to this 
appropriation. 

It has been said, with truth, that the Constitution provides, 
" That no money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in conse- 
quence of appropriations made by law." It is certain that this 
provision is the best security for the liberties of the people in the 
whole of the instrument. Once transfer this branch of power. 



1822] SPEECH ON INDIAN APPROPRIATIONS 13 

vested in Congress, by the Constitution, to the Executive, and 
your freedom is but an empty name. That Department of the 
Government having then the command of the purse, might very 
soon assume the power of the sword. 

Has the Secretary of War violated this salutary provision? 
Has he drawn money out of the Treasury without an appropria- 
tion made by law for that purpose? Unquestionably not. So 
far from asking you to sanction such an unconstitutional measure, 
he is now requesting you to make an appropriation to supply a 
deficiency in the means which you had provided to enable him 
to discharge positive duties, enjoined upon him by your own laws. 

Whether this deficiency shall be supplied out of the public 
purse, or the Secretary be made responsible in his private capacity 
to those with whom he has made contracts on the faith of the 
Government, is the only question now before the Committee. 

Here let me ask gentlemen, why they are so much alarmed 
at the fact that the appropriation has proved deficient? Deficien- 
cies must and will occur so long as the men who wield the des- 
tinies of this Government are fallible. Nothing short of the 
spirit of prophecy can prevent them from happening, unless Con- 
gress should think proper to make such overwhelming appropria- 
tions as would be sufficient to cover all contingencies, not only 
probable but possible. They existed even while the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Randolph) was Chairman of the Committee 
of Ways and Means. I speak the honest sentiments of my heart 
when I declare that, in my opinion, he possessed as much pene- 
tration as any gentleman who ever occupied that distinguished 
station. Calculate, with the nicest precision, the future probable 
expenses of any department of the Government, and in the course 
of the year for which the estimate is made suppose there should 
be no events of extraordinary occurrence, still it will be a miracle 
if ever the appropriation shall be exactly equal to all the necessary 
expenditures. At the instant of time when the sum appropriated 
is expended in executing your laws, would you have the wheels 
of Government to stop ? Would you declare that all your public 
agents who had served you faithfully should receive no compen- 
sation, merely because either you or your Secretary of War, in 
the beginning of the year, could not foresee the expenses which 
might be incurred before its end? 

Take for example the Army. Admit, for the sake of argu- 
ment that which is impossible, even in times of the most profound 
tranquillity, that you had estimated its future annual expense to 



14 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

a fraction, and had made an appropriation accordingly. Suppose 
that during the recess of Congress political storms should envelope 
your country, that treason at home, or war from abroad, were 
about to disturb your peace, and that the point of meditated attack 
was within the knowledge of your Executive. Under such cir- 
cumstances, would the President of the United States be justified, 
either to his conscience or to his constituents, if he were not to 
march the Army from all quarters of the Union to the district of 
danger. What would you then think of his justification, if he 
informed you, that he neglected to provide for the common de- 
fence, because the Army appropriation was too small to enable 
him to embody the forces. Such conduct would be treason 
against the Republic. 

Your security, in all cases of this kind, arises from that 
admirable provision of the Constitution which declares that no 
money shall be drawn from the Treasury but under the authority 
of law. When any officer of the Government applies for the pas- 
sage of a bill to supply a deficiency, you always inquire into the 
reason why it has occurred ; and, if his conduct, upon examina- 
tion, is found to be correct, you will, as you have always hitherto 
done, supply the deficiency. 

This course of policy is not only necessary in itself, but it 
gives you a much greater control over the public purse than if, 
in the beginning of the year, you were to make your appropria- 
tions sufficiently large to cover all contingencies. Such conduct 
would be a powerful temptation to the officer to become extrava- 
gant in the expenditure of public money. 

Let us, then, inquire whether it was necessary that the sum 
of $170,000 should have been expended in the Indian department 
during the year 1821, to carry into effect the spirit and intention 
of the different acts of Congress. 

It has been urged, that, as Congress appropriated but 
$100,000 to defray the current expenses of that department dur- 
ing the last year, the Secretary was bound to confine himself 
within that amount. The necessary consequence would be, that 
the laws establishing that branch of our policy were, in this 
manner, at least in part, repealed. 

This is, I confess, the first occasion on which I have ever 
heard that a system of laws which had received a fixed construc- 
tion by the practice of the nation for more than twenty years, 
could be repealed, not by withdrawing the whole, but a part of 
the appropriation necessary to carry them into effect. If this 



1822] SPEECH ON INDIAN APPROPRIATIONS 15 

were the case, it would give to estimates, uncertain in their very 
nature, the effect of expunging from our statute book the most 
wholesome regulations. Nay, more, it would be delegating legis- 
lative power to the Head of a Department, and would introduce 
the very evil against which gentlemen are so anxious to guard. 
By this construction, if there be laws in existence enjoining a 
variety of duties on any officer of the Government; and if, to 
enable him to discharge all those duties, an annual expenditure of 
$170,000 is necessary, your appropriation of but $100,000 to that 
purpose would make him the legislator, instead of yourselves. 
You thus necessarily vest in him the power of deciding what parts 
of the system shall remain in vigor, and what parts shall fall 
before his power. In order to ascertain what laws are repealed, 
you would be obliged to resort, not to your statute book, but to the 
Head of a Department. Even then, they would be forever vary- 
ing, because, whilst he confined himself within his appropriation, 
he might at pleasure range through the whole system as it origi- 
nally stood, and select from it such parts as he thought proper to 
carry into effect. This is not the manner in which Congress ever 
will, or ever can, manifest their intention. If they desire to 
reduce the expenses of any Department of the Government, they 
themselves will lop off every branch which they deem superfluous, 
and not leave it to the discretion of any Executive officer, no 
matter how exalted his station. Whilst, however, certain duties 
are enjoined on any Department of the Government, by acts of 
Congress, or by treaties, we are bound to supply the officer with 
the means necessary to the performance of those duties. If, in 
such a case, our appropriation has been insufficient, we ought at 
once to supply the deficiency. 

What then is the present condition of that Department of the 
Government called the Indian department? The objects of its ex- 
penditure, designated by acts of Congress, and by treaties, which 
are equally the supreme law of the land, are of a two-fold char- 
acter. From the nature of the first, the probable expense can 
be ascertained without difficulty, because it consists of the salaries 
allowed to agents, sub-agents, interpreters, and blacksmiths, and, 
we are informed, by the letter of the Secretary, that its amount 
is not less than sixty thousand dollars annually. The other 
objects of expense, although authorized by acts of Congress and 
treaties, are, in their character, so uncertain that the expenses 
incurred upon them are necessarily contingent in amount. They 
are detailed in the letter of the Secretary of War, and consist of 



fe 



16 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

" occasional presents to Indians visiting the Agencies, rations 
issued to them while there, also to distressed Indians, and to the 
Indians when assembled, for the purpose of distributing their 
annuities, transportation of annuities, farming and manufacturing 
utensils for the use of the Indians," &c. The two acts of Con- 
gress, the one passed the 13th May, 1800, and the other the 30th 
March, 1802, are the foundation on which our system of policy, 
towards the Indians, has been raised by subsequent legislative 
provisions and by treaties. The expenses of this department 
were : 

In 1808 $140,600 

1809 125,600 

1810 146,600 

1811 146,600 

1812 164,500 

1813 164,500 

1814 464,500 

1815 200,000 

1816 200,000 

1817 200,000 

1818 250,000 

1819 213,000 

1820 200,000 

In addition to these sums, which appear on the appropriation 
bills of the several years, the last Congress supplied a deficiency 
of $130,205.44, for the years 181 5 and 181 7. 

This system, so eminently calculated to preserve tranquillity 
around our borders, and to prevent the intrigues of another nation 
from obtaining for them an undue ascendency over the minds of 
the savages, had been long established, and was as much incor- 
porated into your policy as that of sending ambassadors to foreign 
courts. Did Congress express any disapprobation of this sys- 
tem? Did they destroy any part of the bill which appropriated 
$100,000 for the current expenses of the year? Did they intend 
that the Secretary should destroy the objects of ascertained or of 
contingent expense? Both had been equally provided for by 
your laws and by your treaties. Did Congress mean either that 
the Indians should receive no rations at your military posts, or 
that no presents should be given to them, or that they should 
be deprived of the benefit of receiving agricultural instruments 
from your hands ? If they did, they have expressed no such deter- 
mination by any law. The consequence of the construction con- 
tended for is, that if they intended anything by appropriating but 



1822] SPEECH ON INDIAN APPROPRIATIONS 17 

$100,000, it was to enable the Secretary to legislate in your behalf, 
and to repeal so much of existing laws and existing treaties as 
would reduce the expense to $100,000. This he had no power to 
do, and to allow him to exercise it would establish a most danger- 
ous precedent against the liberties of this people. It would be 
to allow an officer to stop the wheels of Government, and paralyze 
the energies of the law the moment the appropriation which had 
been made was expended. 

Could the Secretary have ever supposed that you intended to 
destroy any part of this establishment? Certainly not, because 
the expenditures are most just as well as most politic. You have 
driven that noble race of men from the hunting grounds which 
God and nature intended for their support. You have caused 
intestine wars to rage continually among them, by driving remote 
tribes near together, and thus making it necessary to their exist- 
ence that they should invade the hunting grounds of each other. 
During the very last year, it appears from the letter of the Secre- 
tary that the disbursements have been increased by the emigration 
of the Indians from the States of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, 
beyond the Mississippi. After thus crowding them together, 
you make them waste their scanty supply of game, by inducing 
them to destroy it without necessity, so that you may obtain their 
fur to gratify your appetite for luxury. In this situation, to 
which they have been reduced by our policy, the laws have pro- 
vided that, when the cravings of hunger shall drive these children 
of the forest to your military posts, either on the frontier or in 
their own territory, they shall receive food ; that, in order to pre- 
serve their existence, and enable them to live upon the circum- 
scribed limits within which they have been driven, they should be 
taught agriculture, and receive the implements of husbandry; 
that, when their chiefs think proper to visit your metropolis, you 
will enable them to do so by paying their expenses, and thus 
manifest to them the extent of both your power and your friend- 
ship. In short, all the other provisions which our laws and our 
treaties have made for them, and which I shall not detail, are 
founded, not only in the strictest justice, but in the wisest policy. 

Did Congress intend, by the mere act of appropriating 
$100,000 for the current expenses of the last year, that the head 
of a Department should alter the laws of the land, and that he 
might at his will declare what part of the Indian system should 
be in force, and what part should be considered as repealed? 
Was it, for example, their determination that no treaties should 

2 



18 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

be held with the Indians, however necessary they might have 
been, because the Secretary had thought proper to apply the 
whole of your appropriations to other objects? This never could 
have been their intention. Congress alone have the power of 
changing this system of policy. Whenever they think proper to 
do so, by unequivocal legislative acts, then, and not till then, 
does it become the duty of Executive officers to obey. They dare 
not sooner neglect to carry existing laws and treaties into effect. 

Suppose the Secretary had thought proper materially to alter 
our policy towards the Indians, and the first information you 
heard of the change was, as it probably would have been, the 
howl of savage warfare around your borders, and the shrieks 
of helpless women and children under the scalping-knife ! Could 
you then have justified his conduct? Would you then have told 
him that he had the power of altering the whole system, because a 
sufficient appropriation had not been made to keep it in motion 
till the end of the year? And this, too, when the very sentence 
before the appropriation of $100,000 provided that $130,205.44 
should be drawn from the Treasury, to cover past arrearages in 
the Indian department? The legitimate meaning of a reduction 
in the appropriation was not to destroy any part of our policy 
towards the Indians, but to warn the Secretary to use the strictest 
economy in carrying every part of it into effect. It has produced 
that happy rfesult. He has informed you that the expenses of the 
present year will not exceed $150,000. This sum is upwards 
of $85,000 less than, upon an average, was appropriated to the 
same purpose, in each year, from 181 5 to 1820, both inclusive. 
It was but a few thousand dollars more than was expended for 
the use of the same department for each of the two last years of 
Mr. Jefferson. In the meantime our relations with the Indians 
have been greatly extended with our extending frontier, and we 
have become acquainted with tribes, of which before we had never 
even heard the names. This great curtailment of expense places 
the character of the present Secretary, in this particular, upon an 
exalted eminence ; and the more so, as it is well known that not 
one cent more of money was expended by the administration of 
Mr. Jefferson than was necessary to accomplish its objects. 

But suppose, for the sake of argument, that the Secretary 
ought to have inferred from your appropriation bill, that you in- 
tended he should change the Indian system, still, we should vote 
the $70,000 to supply the deficit. If we do not, we require that 
he should have performed miracles. 



1822] SPEECH ON INDIAN APPROPRIATIONS 19 

This system has been in constant and in vigorous operation 
since 1802. For six years before the passage of the last appro- 
priation bill, its average annual expense had been more than 
$235,000. That bill did not pass until the 3d of March. Before 
that time, it has not been alleged that there had been a whisper 
of disapprobation against the former appropriations for the In- 
dian department. On the contrary, during that period, $200,000 
at least had been appropriated every year ; and. in addition, large 
deficiencies had been supplied without a murmur. The Secretary, 
acting under a firm conviction that the same system would be 
pursued, had taken the measures necessary to continue its motion 
for another year, some time before the passage of the bill. The 
places at which the money was principally to be expended, were 
agencies upon the borders of your vast empire, far beyond the 
utmost limits of civilization. The distance to many of them is so 
remote, and the communication so precarious, that the Secretary 
has informed you they cannot be heard from more than twice, 
and often but once, in the whole course of the year. 

Could the motion of this vast machinery be at once sus- 
pended? In the beautiful language of the gentleman from South 
Carolina (Mr. Lowndes), it had received its impulse before the 
passage of the bill, and the momentum could not be withdrawn 
from it in a shorter period of time than one year. To require 
the Secretary, therefore, to stop it immediately, would have been 
asking him to do that which was utterly impossible. 

These, Mr. Chairman, are the remarks which I conceived 
it to be my duty to make on the subject now before the Commit- 
tee. I have, personally, no feeling of partiality for the Secretary 
of War, nor of prejudice against him. I view him merely as a 
public character; and, in that capacity, I conscientiously believe, 
that, upon the present occasion, he has done his duty, and acted 
in the only manner in which he could constitutionally act. In my 
opinion, therefore, he deserves applause instead of censure. 

One other view of the subject, Mr. Chairman, and I shall 
have done. In whatever light the conduct of the Secretary may 
appear, still the deficit ought to be supplied. This case does not 
require such an argument ; but suppose, for a moment, he had 
acted improperly, is this one of those extreme cases — for, I admit, 
that such may possibly exist — in which the House should withhold 
an appropriation to supply a deficiency ? Will any gentleman say, 
that individuals who have fairly and honestly entered into con- 
tracts with your Secretary of War, on the faith of the Govern- 



20 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

ment, shall suffer? Surely you would not impose the task on 
every person who binds himself by agreement, to perform services 
for the Government, to inquire whether the appropriation made by 
Congress justified his employment. If you did, he then becomes 
responsible — for what, in the nature of things, cannot be within 
his knowledge. To enable him to ascertain whether he might 
safely contract with the head of one of your Executive Depart- 
ments, he should be informed not only of the amount of appro- 
priations, but in what manner their expenditure has proceeded, 
and is proceeding, in every part of the Union. It would be crying 
injustice to inform the men who have abandoned civilized life, 
and undergone all the dangers, the hardships, and the privations 
of dwelling among savages in the wilderness, for the purpose of 
promoting the interest and the glory of their countiy, that they 
shall receive no compensation for their services, because the Secre- 
tary who employed them has exceeded his appropriation. This 
would be making the innocent suffer instead of the guilty. If, 
therefore, there has been any impropriety in the conduct of the 
Secretary, as some gentlemen have insinuated, but which I utterly 
deny, it is a question which should be settled between you and 
him, and one in the decisions of which the rights of the persons 
employed under his authority ought not to be involved. Indeed, 
no gentleman has yet said these men ought not to be paid out of 
the public Treasury. Why, then, considering this question in 
every point of view in which it can be presented, is there anv 
objection against voting $70,000 to supply the deficiency in the 
appropriation of the last year ? I hope it will pass without further 
difficultv.^ 



RESOLUTION AND REMARKS, JANUARY 24,1822, 

ON MILITIA FINES.2 

January 24, 1822, Mr. Buchanan submitted for consideration 
the following resolution : 

Resolved, That a committee be appointed, whose duty it shall be to 
inquire and report to this House the causes why no part of the sum of 
$243,609.41, the amount imposed as fines by courts-martial held under the 



^January ii, 1822, the debate continuing, Buchanan made some remarks 
in opposition to a motion to postpone consideration of the bill till certain 
information should be obtained from the Secretary of War. (Annals of 
Congress, 17 Cong, i Sess. 1821-1822, I. 704-708.) 

* Annals of Congress, 17 Cong, i Sess. 1821-1822, I. 787-789. 



1822] MILITIA FINES 21 

authority of the United States on militiamen within the Commonwealth ot 
Pennsylvania, for delinquencies which occurred during the late war with 
Great Britain, has yet been received into the Treasury; how much of the 
said sum has been collected from the delinquents by the late marshal and the 
present marshals of Pennsylvania, and their deputies, respectively, and what 
are the names and places of residence of such deputies; how much of the 
money collected remains in the hands of the deputies, and how much has 
been paid over by them to their respective principals; who are the sureties 
of the late marshal John Smith, and of his deputies, respectively; what is 
the amount of each of their bonds, and what is the prospect of recovering 
the whole or any part of the money remaining in their hands; what causes 
have heretofore prevented the institution of suits against the said John 
Smith, his deputies, and their sureties, to recover the militia fines retained 
by them, respectively; and under what authority, by whom and to whom, the 
sum of $41,531.77 has been paid out of the said fines to defray the expenses 
of the courts-martial by which they were assessed. 

In offering this resolution, Mr. Buchanan said, that a sense 
of duty, and not a desire to give trouble and cast reflections upon 
any officer of this Government, compelled him to bring before this 
House the subject of the collection of militia fines from delinquent 
militiamen in Pennsylvania. He would, he said, state the facts 
connected with it, and which were so many reasons why the reso- 
lution should pass, without doing more at the present time. The 
State of Pennsylvania during the late war furnished her full pro- 
portion of men and of money to the General Government to 
enable them to carry on the contest. She furnished more than 
her quota of volunteers and militia. It however happened, that, 
owing to the pious and peaceful habits of the people of that State, 
conscientiously scrupulous of bearing arms, there occurred, in 
obtaining the number of men required by draught, a great number 
of delinquencies; wdiich were more than made up by volunteers. 
It followed, therefore, that while Pennsylvania, as a State, can 
with pride and with pleasure declare that she fulfilled, in the most 
ample manner, all her federal obligations, yet there was a very 
large proportion of her citizens fined as delinquent militiamen. 
From the letter of the Secretary of War, of February 14, 1821, 
it appeared that out of nine States, on the citizens of which militia 
fines were assessed, and from eight of which returns have been 
received, the fines assessed on citizens of Pennsylvania amount 
to a larger sum than all the fines assessed on the citizens of seven 
of the States : 

The assessment on Pennsylvania amounted to $243,609.41 

On New Hampshire, New York, Maryland, Virginia, 

Ohio, Kentucky, East Tennessee, West Tennessee, to 240,076 



2!2 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

These fines were assessed, chiefly, if not altogether, within 
the years 1813, 1814, and 1815; and, strange and wonderful as 
it may appear, not one cent of that large amount assessed on 
citizens of Pennsylvania has yet reached the Treasury of the 
United States. It is within my knowledge, said Mr. B., that 
very large sums of this money have been collected by the deputy 
marshals, and much distress has been spread over the country in 
levying these fines from the poorer classes of the citizens within 
our State. It is very natural that every State in the Union, 
particularly Pennsylvania, should be anxious to have the darkness 
which hangs over this subject dispelled, and the guilty agent? 
exposed to the light of day. It is possible that by an investi- 
gation something may be obtained; if not, the authors of the 
shameful frauds which have been perpetrated will be dragged 
from the concealment in which they now lurk. On the 4th of 
December. 1820, at the instance of a gentleman from Pennsyl- 
vania, a resolution was passed by this House calling on the Secre- 
tary of the Treasury for information on the subject, which for 
some cause or other remained unanswered, but on the 2d of 
January, 1821, was renewed. And, said Mr. B., what answer has 
been given to it? It consists of six clauses, answers to which 
would embrace all the information we desire. The answer to the 
first is a letter from the present marshal, which Mr. B. read ; from 
which, he said, it appeared, that almost three years had been suf- 
fered to expire since this communication, and it does not appear 
that any measures have been taken to secure the books and papers. 

The department could therefore communicate no information 
on the subject. The second query, how much money had been 
received into the Treasury, on account of these fines, was easilv 
answered; not a cent had been received. The third query the 
department is unable to answer, except that $3,671.30 in the hands 
of the present marshal, and $2,546.60 in the hands of Lewis 
Deffebach. one of his deputies in Bucks county. The fourth 
query, as to the names of the deputies and the sureties of the late 
marshal, was not answered. Indeed, it appeared that the depart- 
ment never either inquired or knew who' were the sureties 
of tlie marshal, or Avho were his deputies or sureties. It 
appeared, further, that no action had ever yet been instituted 
against the late marshal or his deputies on these bonds, except 
against one of the deputies. The object, therefore, Mr. B. said, 
of his resolution, was to obtain the information which the former 
vote of the House had failed to procure, &c. 



1822] MILITIA FINES 23 

The motion of Mr. B. was agreed to, and Messrs. Buchanan, 
Moore of Pennsylvania, Nelson of Maryland, DurfeC; and Rich, 
were appointed the committee. 

The committee reported, April 25, 1822.' It is not stated by whom the 
report was drawn, but it probably was done by Mr. Buchanan. It covers 15 
printed pages, and recommends the adoption of a resolution to the effect that 
the uncollected militia fines due from delinquents in the State of Pennsyl- 
vania which had been assessed by courts-martial, and all fines collected by 
the late or present marshals of Pennsylvania, or their deputies, which had not 
been paid into the Treasury of the United States or applied to the payment 
of the expenses of courts-martial, be transferred to the State of Pennsylvania, 
with full power to collect them. The report referred to the subject as one 
involved in " mystery," on account of the total neglect for so long a time of 
the proper public officers to give it attention. The committee's recommenda- 
tion appears to have been in accord with a resolution of the legislature of 
Pennsylvania, passed on the 29th of March. The report stated that there 
could be no doubt that the President possessed the power to call forth the 
militia, and that the federal government had a right to the fines assessed on 
individuals as a punishment for disobeying such a call, but it was argued 
that Pennsylvania had furnished during the war more than the number of 
militia required for the service of the federal government; that of the 
men thus furnished a considerable proportion were volunteers ; that, in 
procuring the residue by draft, the number of delinquents was so great that 
the fines assessed amounted to the sum of $346,367; that, as the State of 
Pennsylvania had more than complied with all her federal obligations, it 
would be unjust to collect in addition the large sum above stated; that the 
federal officials would in any event be able to collect probably only a small 
amount from the delinquents who were scattered over the surface of an 
extensive State; that the State might be able, through its county officers, 
to collect a small proportion of the fines, and that a relinquishment to her 
would be a benefit to the State without doing any injury to the United States. 
It was also pointed out that the act of Congress of 1795, although it provided 
for the punishment of delinquent militiamen by courts-martial, did not specify 
how such courts should be organized; that the militia law of Pennsylvania 
supplied this defect, and that the fines were therefore assessed by virtue of 
the joint operation of both acts; that, in the opinion of the President, as 
shown by a letter of the Secretary of State to the authorities of Pennsylvania 
of April 14, 1818, the power of remitting the fines in question was not in 
fact vested in him, but in the governor of Pennsylvania; that the governor 
had uniformly exercised this power, and that the fines in question might at 
any time all be remitted by him. 



^ House Report 97, 17 Cong, i Sess. 



£4 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

SPEECH, MARCH 12, 1822, 

ON THE BANKRUPTCY BILL.» 

Mr. Speaker : Before the amendment proposed by the gen- 
tleman from Kentucky had obtained the sanction of this House, 
the question whether the bill should be engrossed for a third read- 
ing was one of very great importance. That question has, how- 
ever, dwindled into insignificance compared with the one at pres- 
ent under consideration. We are now called upon to decide the 
fate of a measure of awful importance. The most dreadful re- 
sponsibility rests upon us. We are not now to determine merely 
whether a bankrupt law shall be extended to the trading classes of 
the community but whether it shall embrace every citizen of this 
Union and spread its demoralizing influence over the whole 
surface of society. 

The amendment which has been adopted to-day makes it 
my imperative duty, even at this protracted period of the debate, 
to trespass upon the patience of the House. I have the honor in 
part of representing an honest, a wealthy, and a respectable, agri- 
cultural community, I owe it to them, to my conscience and to 
my God not to suffer this bill to pass, which I conceive to be now 
fraught with destruction to their best interests, both moral and 
political, without entering my solemn protest against its 
provisions. 

We have heard it repeated over and over again by the friends 
of a bankrupt bill that it should be confined to the mercantile 
classes. One of the principal arguments urged in its favor by 
its eloquent supporters, was that merchants from the nature of 
their pursuits were exposed to the vicissitudes of fortune more 
than other men, and that, therefore, their situation required a 
peculiar system of laws. That in this country their fortunes had 
not only been exposed to the dangers commonly incident to their 
profession, but that the commercial regulations of the government, 
the embargo, the non-intercourse laws, and, finally the w^ar, had 
brought ruin upon thousands. It was, therefore, inferred that 
Congress were under a moral obligation to pass a bankrupt law 
for their relief. 



Annals of Congress, \^ Cong, i Sess. 1821-1822, II. 1281-1297. 
Buchanan, in an autobiographical sketch given in the last volume of this 
publication, says: "This was one of the best speeches I ever delivered in 
Congress. ... I was replied to by Mr. Wright of Maryland, when the 
question was taken by ayes and noes and decided against the bill by a vote 
of 99 to 72." 



1822] THE BANKRUPTCY BILL 25 

The policy of all the modern commercial nations in the 
world was presented before us for our imitation; England, 
France, Scotland, Ireland, Holland, and Spain, we had been told, 
each extended a bankrupt law to the merchant, and absolved him 
from the payment of his debts upon certain conditions. Indeed, 
a great portion of the argument consisted in drawing a line of 
distinction between traders and the remaining classes of society. 

Judge then, Mr. Speaker, of my astonishment when, to-day, 
I found those very gentlemen voting in favor of introducing an 
amendment extending the provisions of this bill to every indi- 
vidual in society who might ask to become its object. 

Will you pass a bankrupt law for the farmer? Will you 
teach that vast body of your best citizens to disregard the faith 
of contracts ? Are you prepared to sanction a principle by which 
the whole mass of society will be in danger of being demoralized, 
and it will be left to an election by every man's creditors, in which 
a majority of two-thirds in number and value, against the consent 
of the remainder, shall have the power of discharging him from 
the obligation of all his contracts ? Surely the House of Repre- 
sentatives are not prepared to answer these questions in the 
affirmative. No nation in the world, whether commercial or 
agricultural, whether civilized or savage, has ever for a moment 
entertained the idea of extending the operation of their bankrupt 
laws beyond the class of traders. Fortunately for our constit- 
uents, we have not the power of doing so. The Constitution cor- 
rectly expounded has proclaimed, " hitherto shalt thou go, but 
no farther." Nothing but a desperate effort to revive this expir- 
ing bill could have ever induced its friends to have adopted the 
amendment which has just now been carried. 

In the discussion of this question, I can assure the House, 
it is not my intention to travel over the ground which has been 
already occupied, or to repeat the arguments which have been 
already urged. 

The subject naturally divides itself into two questions — the 
one of Constitutional power, the other of policy. On the first, 
as the bill stood before the introduction of the last amendment, 
I had not a single doubt. Much as I would have deprecated the 
passage of the then bill, I should have been infinitely more alarmed 
if this House had determined that the enactment of such a law 
transcended the constitutional power of Congress. Upon this 
branch of the subject, the ingenious arguments of the gentleman 
from Virginia had not created a doubt in my mind. Where 



26 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

doubts before did exist, the argument of the gentleman from 
South CaroHna (Mr. Lowndes), and of my honorable colleague 
(Mr. Sergeant) were, in my opinion, calculated entirely to re- 
move them, and to carry conviction to every understanding. 

A new question of constitutional power has now arisen on 
the amendment. The Constitution declares that " the Congress 
shall have power to establish uniform laws on the subject of bank- 
ruptcies throughout the United States." To this provision I am 
willing to give a fair and a liberal construction. Congress have 
the power to discharge from their debts on the terms prescribed 
by the bill, all persons upon whom a law emanating from this 
clause of the Constitution may legitimately act. But can Con- 
gress make a law extending the penalties and the privileges of a 
bankrupt system to every individual in society? Can they em- 
brace in its provision the farmer, the clergyman, the physician, 
or the lawyer ? Such a proposition was never seriously contended 
for before this day. 

By considering the meaning of the term bankrupt, we shall 
be able at once to solve the difficulty. In adverting to its origin, 
we find the literal signification of the word to be a broken counter, 
which by a figure of speech has been applied in our language to 
a broken merchant. In the commercial laws of all the nations 
of the continent of Europe, bankruptcy is confined to merchants in 
the strictest sense of the word. The operation of the bankrupt 
laws of England has been extended by judicial construction some- 
what further, and they now embrace within their grasp, not only 
the merchant properly so called, but all persons who are traders, 
and are concerned in buying and selling any kind of merchandise, 
unless they have been expressly excepted by some positive legis- 
lative provision. This exposition of the law extends not only 
to those who sell any commodity in the same state in which they 
purchased it, but also to the manufacturer and the mechanic who 
bestow upon it their labor and their skill, and thus render it more 
valuable. ^ The liill, as it formerly stood, confined itself strictly 
within this range. Indeed, it was more circumscribed as to the 
per.sons on whom it would have operated than the bankrupt laws 
f)f England. 

T rim willing, then, to expound the power of Congress upon 
the subject liberally. In construing the Constitution? Congress 
ought not to be fettered by nice technical rules. I admit that they 
have the power, whenever they think proper to call it into exer- 
cise, of establishing a system of bankruptcy which shall embrace 



1822] THE BANKRUPTCY BILL 27 

all persons who have ever been embraced even by the bankrupt 
laws of England. Further than this they cannot proceed, without 
extending the plain meaning of the word, bankruptcy, as it has 
been received by every commercial nation of Europe, and violating 
both the letter and the spirit of the Constitution. 

In making this admission, I am sensible that many may sup- 
pose I am giving a latitude of construction to the instrument 
which is not warranted by its spirit. 

The authority " to establish uniform laws on the subject of 
bankruptcies throughout the United States," is contained in a 
clause of the Constitution, which immediately follows that " to 
regulate commerce with Foreign Nations, and among the several 
States, and with the Indian tribes." The power over bankruptcy 
evidently originated from, and is closely connected with that over 
commerce. This commerce Avhich Congress has the power of 
regulating, is chiefly, if not exclusively, conducted by merchants, 
in the strictest sense of the term, and principally by that class of 
them denominated importers. They are the men most exposed 
to the vicissitudes of trade, and, on that account, are more prop- 
erly the object of such a law than people of any other description. 
It might, therefore, with much plausibility, be contended, that the 
power of Congress over bankruptcy is confined to that description 
of merchants. 

Another argument, which would give additional strength to 
this construction, arises from the general spirit of the Federal 
Institutions. They do not propose to embrace the internal policy 
of the States. The jurisdiction of the federal courts is confined 
by the Constitution to controversies between citizens of the dif- 
ferent States, and between foreigners and citizens of the United 
States. To such suits the merchants who carry on the intercourse 
with foreign nations, and between the different States, are most 
generally parties. 

The object which I have in view in using these arguments, 
is not to prove that the constitutional power of Congress is con- 
fined to such merchants, but to show that it is contrary to the 
nature and the spirit of our government to extend it to all classes 
of people in the community. The bill as it stood before the 
amendment, went quite far enough. It would even then have 
brought the operation of the law, and the jurisdiction of the fed- 
eral courts into the bosom of every community. The bill, how- 
ever, as it now stands, if it should pass, will entirely destroy the 
symmetry of our system, and make those courts the arbiters. 



28 I'm: WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

in almost ever)' case of contract to which any member of society, 
who thinks proper to become a bankrupt, may be a party. It 
will at once be, in a great degree, a judicial consolidation of the 
Union. This was never intended by the framers of the Consti- 
tution. Some of the terrible evils which would flow from such 
a system, I shall have occasion to delineate, when I come to speak 
of the policy of its adoption. 

Before, Mr. Speaker, I proceed to expose to the view of the 
House those objections against this bill which have presented 
themselves with peculiar force to my mind, permit me to answer 
some of the principal arguments which have been urged in favor 
of its passage. My friend and colleague from Pennsylvania, 
in his concluding speech, has made such a clear, forcible, and 
eloquent argument in favor of the bill, that I fear it has produced 
a considerable effect. Upon this occasion he was listened to, as 
he always is, and always deserves to be, with the most profound 
attention. It is painful to me to be under the necessity of differ- 
ing from him in opinion, and when I do so, I am almost inclined 
to distrust my own judgment. Nothing, therefore, but an im- 
perative sense of duty could have induced me to take any part in 
the debate upon the present occasion. 

It has been urged that, as the framers of the Constitution 
gave to Congress the power of passing a bankrupt law, we are 
bound to put that power into practical operation, and not sufifer 
it to remain dormant. 

In answer to this argument I would reply, that power and 
duty are very different in their nature. Power is optional, duty" 
imperative. The language of power is that you may, that of 
duty you must. The Constitution has, in the same section, and 
in the same terms, given to Congress the power to declare war. to 
borrow money, to raise and support armies, &c. Will any gentle- 
nian, however, undertake to say, we are under an obligation to 
give life and energy to these powers by bringing them into action ? 
\\ ill it be contended that, because we possess the power of declar- 
ing war and borrowing money, that we are under a moral obli- 
gation to embroil ourselves with foreign Governments, or load 
the country with a national debt? Should any individual act 
upon the principle that it is his duty to do everything which he 
has the legal power of doing, he would soon make himself a fit 
citizen for a madhouse. 

Power, whether vested in Congress or in an individual, 
necessarily implies the right of exercising a sound discretion. 



1822] THE BANKRUPTCY BILL 29 

The Constitution was intended not only for ns, and for those who 
have gone before us, but for generations yet to come. It has 
vested in Congress ample powers, to be called into action when- 
ever, in their sound discretion, they believe the interest or the 
happiness of the people require their exertion. We are, therefore, 
left to exercise our judgment on this subject, entirely untram- 
melled by any Constitutional injunction. 

It has been said that the passage of such a bill as the one 
now before us is necessary, on account of the numerous frauds 
which are perpetrated under the insolvent laws of the States, 
and the preference which they authorize a failing debtor to give 
to particular creditors. 

For the forcible manner in which this argument has been 
urged, one would be induced to suppose that the legislative 
authority of the States, upon this subject, had been entirely pros- 
trated by the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, 
in the case of Sturges vs. Crowninshield. This is, however, alto- 
gether a mistake. The citizens of the States have not been left 
exposed to the mercy of fraudulent debtors. They can look to 
their own legislatures for relief. Their power to pass bankrupt 
laws is as ample within their several States as that of Congress, 
with one single exception : which is, that such laws shall not 
contain a provision " impairing the obligation of contracts." 
This tremendous power the people have decreed that the States 
shall not exercise. With the exception, therefore, of that portion 
of this bill which discharges a bankrupt from his debts, the Legis- 
latures of the several States might, if they thought proper, enact 
all its provisions. They have the same power to pass every 
law for the prevention and punishment of the frauds of insolvent 
traders which Congress possess. They can equally annul all 
preferences which a failing debtor may give to a favorite creditor, 
whether by deed of trust, by judgment, or in any other manner. 
This principle is expressly recognized in the opinion of the 
Supreme Court of the LTnited States in the case which I have 
cited. There is then no necessity that Congress should interfere 
for the purpose of securing the creditor ; yet this has been urged 
as one of the principal reasons in favor of the passage of a 
bankrupt bill. 

It cannot be denied that many of the States have neglected 
to exercise the authority which they fully possess over this sub- 
ject. In the State, one of whose representatives I have the honor 
to be, a failing debtor of every description possesses too much 



:{0 



THE >V()RKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 



power in the distribution of his property. He may, if he chooses, 
secure one creditor at the expense of all the rest. He is the sole 
judge of the propriety of any preference which he may think 
pn^per to make. The Legislature of that, and of every other 
State where a similar evil exists, can however apply the remedy, 
if they think proper. Why then has it been urged upon us, that 
it is absolutely necessary Congress should pass this bill, to secure 
creditors against the frauds and the preferences w^hich exist under 
the insolvent laws of the States, when the States themselves 
possess ample powers to attain the same ends? 

It has been said, truly, that Congress alone can pass a bank- 
rupt law which will be uniform over the United States. But, 
I would ask, whether the benefits resulting from the uniformity 
which the law must possess would not be more nominal than real, 
whilst, on the other hand, it w^ould be a source of the most serious 
inconveniences? Is it correct legislation to force upon the citizens 
of one State a system of internal policy, deeply affecting the rights 
of creditor and debtor, which may be ruinous and demoralizing 
to them, because it may promote the prosperity of another State? 
All laws should be adapted to the character and to the habits of 
those on whom they are designed to operate. Upon this prin- 
ciple of uniformity, which must be introduced into any bill that 
you have the power of passing, you are obliged to adapt your citi- 
zens to the law, not the law to your citizens. Will any gentleman 
say, that the same internal political regulations, respecting creditor 
and debtor, should exist in each of the States composing this vast 
Union ? For example, would the same laws be suited to the man- 
ners and to the habits of the citizens of Louisiana which might 
be beneficial in the State of Maine? This necessity for uniform- 
ity, in legislating upon the subject of bankruptcy, reminds me of 
the bed of Procrustes. He made every person of every size fit it. 
If they were too long for its dimensions, he lopped off their limbs; 
if too short, he stretched them to the proper length. 

The uniformity w^hich must exist in any law that we have 
the power of passing, shows, in a forcible point of view, the pro- 
priety of State legislation upon the subject, in preference to that 
of Congress, it will be better adapted to the peculiar habits of 
the citizens of the respective States. 

It has been urged, as an objection to State legislation, that. 
as they can pass no law impairing the obligation of contracts, 
they cannot discharge a bankrupt from his debts. This is cer- 
tainly true. If. therefore, it be deemed proper that the States 



1822] THE BANKRUPTCY BILL 31 

should possess that power, it can be bestowed on them by an 
amendment to the Constitution. 

On this part of the subject I am much obliged to my honor- 
able colleague for the clear and forcible distinction which he has 
drawn between contracts, and the means of enforcing them — 
between rights and remedies. This distinction is also precisely 
marked in the opinion of the court in the case of Sturges and 
Crowninshield. The States, it is true, cannot impair the obli- 
gation of a contract, but they possess a discretionary power, to a 
considerable extent, in modifying the remedy of the creditor. I 
have been informed that no species of execution in Rhode Island 
will touch the debtor's real estate, yet the law of that State, in this 
respect, has never been supposed to be unconstitutional. Why 
then might not the States, if they thought it politic, declare, that, 
after a debtor had fairly relinquished all his property for the 
benefit of his creditors, in such a manner as might be directed 
by law, their process of execution should not be used by a vindic- 
tive creditor against the acquisitions of his debtor for a certain 
number of years, and then only against a part of them, and for 
the common benefit of all the creditors? If such a provision, or 
one of a similar nature, be Constitutional — and I confess I can 
perceive no reason, founded either upon principle or precedent, 
sufficient to convince me that it would not — the States already 
possess the power of relieving an honest bankrupt to a considerable 
extent. This is, however, a delicate subject, on which I wish to 
express no decided opinion. How far a State may proceed con- 
stitutionally, in controlling the process of her own courts, has 
never yet been determined. The precise point, at which the power 
of regulating the process would interfere with the prohibition 
against impairing the obligation of the contract, will be difficult 
to ascertain. 

The advocates of this bill have presented it to us in the garb 
of a political experiment. Say they, its duration is limited to 
the term of three years. It must then die, unless its existence 
shall be prolonged by the joint act of all the legislative depart- 
ments. Its enemies, therefore, ought not to apprehend serious 
evils from its enactment. 

In answer to this suggestion, it may be observed, that legis- 
lative experiments should be tried with extreme caution. An 
act may expire in three years by its own limitation : you may 
repeal it at the end of one, should its operation be found 
injurious, but yet its pernicious influence may last for ages. If, 



34 nil: WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

by expunging a law from your statute book, you would efface its 
ctTccts from the human mind, or withdraw its influence from the 
human character, then, indeed, experiments in politics would be 
as iiarmless as those in philosophy. This, however, is not the 
case. We all agree that the bill if it should pass, is what may, 
with propriety, be called a strong measure. It is not a mere 
theory. Its effects upon society will be immediate, and either 
good or evil to a great extent. Whether, therefore, it shall con- 
tiiuie but three years, or be perpetual, ought not much to influence 
the decision of the question. 

The experience of other countries, respecting bankrupt laws, 
has been introduced into this argument by the friends of the bill, 
for the purpose of furthering their views, whilst, on the other 
hand, its enemies have contended, that the practical operation 
of the bankrupt law of England, and of that one which hereto- 
fore existed in this country, present powerful reasons against 
the passage of this bill. Into this controversy I will not enter, 
because the subject has been already fully discussed. There 
is, however, one event in the history of Pennsylvania which 
speaks volumes against the passage of this bill. On the 13th 
March, 1812, the Legislature of that State, after much solici- 
tation, passed a bankrupt or insolvent law, under the provisions 
of which debtors were to be relieved from the obligation of 
their contracts. The operation of this act was confined to 
the city and county of Philadelphia. It was there that the com- 
merce of the State was chiefly conducted, and it was there the 
merchants resided who were most liable to be ruined by the fluc- 
tuations of trade. If there ever was a place where a fair experi- 
ment could have been made of the effects of such a law, Philadel- 
phia was peculiarly that place. What was the consequence? The 
act would have expired by its own limitation on the ist of April, 
1S14, but it was not suffered to exist one month beyond the next 
meeting of the Legislature after its passage. It was repealed 
on the 2 1 St December. 1812. I am now informed, by my col- 
league, (Mr. Brown,) who was then a member of the Legislature, 
that the representatives from that district, who, but a few months 
before, had strained every nerve to procure the passage of the 
i)ill, wt-re the most active in obtaining its repeal. On the very 
first day of the session they presented a great number of petitions 
from their constituents, praying that the law might no longer 
be sufl'ercd to exi«;t. Such were its baneful effects in so short a 
period of time. Whilst on this part of tlic subject I will merely 



1822] THE BANKRUPTCY BILL 33 

add, that this law was repealed long before the Supreme Court 
of the United States had decided that the States had not the 
power of introducing into a bankrupt law a clause discharging 
the bankrupt from his debts. Before this decision was made, the 
Supreme Courts, both of New York and Pennsylvania, had held 
a contrary doctrine. 

I shall now proceed to lay before the House my objections 
to the passage of this bill. As it now stands, certain classes of 
society are exposed to its adverse operation upon the commission 
of any of the acts of bankruptcy described in its first section. 
Every individual in the community, including those embraced by 
the bill previous to the late amendment, may become voluntary 
bankrupts. 

It will be necessary here briefly to inquire who may be de- 
clared bankrupts against their will. The adverse operation of the 
law will not be confined to wholesale and retail merchants, strictly 
speaking, and to dealers in exchange, bankers, brokers, factors, 
underwriters, and marine insurers. By the construction which 
has been placed upon the words, " other person actually using 
the trade of merchandise, by buying and selling in gross or by 
retail," not only every dealer in any article, but every manufac- 
turer or mechanic who purchases any material, bestows his skill 
and labor upon it, and sells it in its improved state, falls within 
the compulsory branch of this bill, unless expressly excepted by 
the proviso in its first section. Thus, the distiller who purchases 
grain, converts it into whiskey and sells the whiskey, would clearly 
be within its operation. The miller, also, who buys wheat and 
sells it converted into flour, may be declared a bankrupt against 
his will. These cases are cited only as examples to illustrate the 
general rule. Each individual member can imagine many others. 

I will now proceed to that which strikes my mind as a radical 
objection to the existence of this or any other adversary bankrupt 
bill in the United States. It arises from the nature of our free 
institutions, and is one that exists in no other country on the 
globe. It springs out of the best principles of the Federal Con- 
stitution, and it cannot be removed without expunging them from 
the instrument. 

In what manner is a person to be declared a bankrupt by the 
bill now before the House? On the petition of any creditor, 
accompanied by an affidavit of the truth of his debt, the circuit 
or district judge of the United States is authorized to issue a 
commission of bankruptcy. The alleged bankrupt may, however, 

3 



34 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

appear before the commissioners, deny that he has committed any 
act of bankruptcy, and demand a trial by a jury of his country, 
before the judge who issued the commission. This is a right 
of whicli he cannot be deprived by the power of Congress. In the 
emphatic language of the Constitution, " he shall not be deprived 
of his life, his liberty, or his property, without due process of 

law." 

This trial before the circuit or district judge may and prob- 
ably will, in a majority of cases, be delayed for years before its 
final termination. In free governments we cannot move with the 
celerity of despotism. During its pendency, what becomes of 
the property of the alleged bankrupt ? He cannot be dispossessed 
of it under the Constitution of the country, or by the provisions 
of this bill, until the jury shall have convicted him of some one of 
the acts of bankruptcy described in its first section. But, although 
it cannot be wrested from him until after the event, yet the 
moment the commission issues, he, in effect, loses all control over 
his estate. The reason of this is, that by the provisions of the bill 
all intermediate dispositions made by the debtor of his property 
are absolutely void, should he finally be declared a bankrupt. 
No person, therefore, could with safety in the meantime enter into 
any contract with him, or purchase any part of his estate. From 
the ver)' nature of an adverse bankrupt system, this must neces- 
sarily be the case. If it were not, every man charged with having 
committed an act of bankruptcy would demand a trial by jury 
before the district or circuit judge of the United States, so that 
during its pendency he might have an opportunity to dispose of 
his property as he thought proper. This would be giving a legal 
sanction to the very evil which the friends of the bill say it is 
chiefly intended to remedy. 

What, then, is the situation in which the bill places every 
man within its adverse provisions? Any of his creditors or pre- 
tended creditors, by making an ex parte affidavit of the truth of 
his debt, without ever proving by his own oath or otherwise any 
act of bankruptcy against him, may bring upon him inevitable 
and overwhelming destruction. If envy or malice against him 
rankles in the soul of any enemy who either is his creditor, or who 
will swear that he is, that enemy may wreak his vengeance to the 
full extent of his wishes, by having a commission of bankruptcy 
issued against him. The commission itself would be the death- 
warrant of his property, notwithstanding his property may have 
been sufficient to discharge his debts, and he may have been guilty 



1822] THE BANKRUPTCY BILL 35 

of no act of bankruptcy. If he submits to the commission, his 
credit is gone, and his power of exertion is at an end until he shall 
have obtained his final discharge. If he does not, and demands a 
trial, he is, during its pendency, in the situation of Tantalus in 
the infernal regions. Although he may be surrounded by all the 
comforts of life, and the means of extricating himself from his 
difficulties, he has not the power of using them. If he should be 
a merchant, his counting-house must be closed, and his capital 
remain idle, awaiting the result of a tedious lawsuit. If he be a 
farmer who has carried on a distillery, or who has been a miller, 
or retail merchant, he cannot dispose of an acre of his land, or any 
of his personal property, until the controversy is determined. 
Whether, therefore, he submits to the commission, or does not, 
if he be an honest man, he is exposed to inevitable ruin. If he 
be a fraudulent debtor, the delay of the trial will afford him 
ample time and opportunity to secrete his property, and place it 
beyond the reach of his creditors; and in this situation he will 
have the strongest temptation to be guilty of fraud. 

The bankrupt law of England, the model from which the 
present bill has been drawn, provides an effectual remedy for this 
evil. It is one, however, which we have no constitutional power 
to adopt; and if we had, it would be repugnant to every feeling 
of the hearts of freemen. In that country the bare issuing of 
the commission is itself equivalent to an execution. 

The debtor is at once deprived of the possession of all his 
property, and it is vested in the commissioners. Although he 
may declare that he has never been guilty of an act of bankruptcy, 
and petition for a trial, he petitions in vain. The iron hand of 
the law is upon him, and no innocence can elude its grasp. In 
that country the law declares that " caveats against commissions 
are not allowed, for they give too much time to a fraudulent 
debtor." The proceedings under it resemble those of the judges 
in the infernal regions, who first condemn and afterwards hear. 
They first deprive a man of all his property by virtue of the 
commission, and after the evil has been done, allow him to apply 
to the chancellor to have it superseded. 

From the nature of those governments on the continent of 
Europe, under whose dominion bankrupt laws prevail, and from 
the peculiar character of those laws, and of the commercial tri- 
bunals by whom they are administered, the same evils do not 
exist. I will not exhaust the patience of the House by detailing 
their different provisions. 



3ti 1 HE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

It may be said that, as the bill provides that the petitioning 
creditor, before the commission can issue, shall give bond to be 
taken by the circuit or district judge, in such penalty and with such 
surety as he mav direct, conditioned that the obligor shall prove 
the debtor to be a bankrupt, he will be enabled to recover damages 
to the extent of any injury which he may sustain in case the con- 
dition of the bond should be violated. 

Tin's remedy, from its nature, could be no compensation for 
the injury sustained. To inform a man, after he had been 
arrested in the pursuit of his business by a commission of bank- 
ruptcy, after his prospects in life had been blasted, after his credit 
had been destroyed, and after he had been pursued for years in a 
course of litigation which had terminated in his favor, that he 
might then enter upon another law-suit, and bring his action 
upon the bond, would be laughing at his calamity. This would 
present no prospect of indemnity, even if the obligors should be 
solvent; but from the ignorance of the judges, so far removed 
from the people, as those of the United States necessarily are, 
respecting the solvency of the sureties; and from the lapse of 
time which must transpire before any suit could be sustained upon 
the bond, it would in most instances be of little or no value. 

These, then, would be the effects of the bill on the persons 
within its adverse operation. 

Let us next inquire what would be the moral and practical 
effects of this bill, with the amendment just adopted of the gen- 
tleman from Kentucky. Should it pass in its present shape, I 
shudder at the consequences. How will it affect the great agri- 
cultural interest of the country? I have the honor, in part, to 
represent a district chiefly composed of farmers. They are 
honest, they are industrious, and they esteem their contracts to 
be sacred and inviolable. The word of most of them, could their 
existence be perpetuated, binds them as forcibly as their bond. 
Have they, or have any other agriculturists over the whole range 
of this extensive Union, asked you to pass a bankrupt law in their 
favor? Have they ever petitioned you to discharge them from 
the obligation of their contracts, which they feel themselves as 
much bound in conscience as in law to perform? It is certain 
that many honest and respectable men of that valuable class of 
society have been unfortunate, and I pity them from my inmost 
soul ; but T beseech you, spare them from a law for which they 
have never asked, and which would tempt them to add guilt to 
misfortune. 



1822] THE BANKRUPTCY BILL 37 

What then would be the necessary operation of such a law, 
when brought home to them and to every other member of 
society? Once declare that contracts shall be no longer sacred; 
that any debtor, whether he has been a trader or not, by complying 
with the provisions of the law, may have an election held by his 
creditors, and if two-thirds of them in number and value consent, 
may be relieved from all his debts against the will of the remain- 
der ; and you make a direct attack on the very first principles of 
moral honesty, by which the great mass of the people have been 
hitherto directed. Let a bankrupt be presented to the view of 
society, who has become wealthy since his discharge, and who, 
after having ruined a number of his creditors, shields himself 
from the payment of his honest debts by his certificate, and what 
effects would such a spectacle be calculated to produce? Exam- 
ples of this nature must at length demoralize any people. The 
contagion introduced by the laws of the country, would, for that 
very reason, spread like a pestilence, until honesty, honor, and 
faith will at length be swept from the intercourse of society. 
Leave the agricultural interest pure and uncorrupted, and they 
will forever form the basis on which the Constitution and liberties 
of your country may safely repose. Do not, I beseech you, teach 
them to think lightly of the solemn obligation of contracts. No 
government on earth, however corrupt, has ever enacted a bank- 
rupt law for farmers ; it would be a perfect monster in this coun- 
try, where our institutions depend altogether upon the virtue of 
the people. We have no constitutional power to pass the amend- 
ment proposed by the gentleman from Kentucky ; and if we had 
we never should do so, because such a provision would spread a 
moral taint through society which would corrupt it to its very core. 

There is another point of view in which this bill, in its prac- 
tical effects, would be intolerable. The jurisdiction of federal 
courts over citizens of the United States is now chiefly confined 
to controversies existing between the citizens of different States. 
This bill, if it should become a law, will amount to almost a 
judicial consolidation of the Union. The litigation which will 
arise out of it, and which, by its provisions, must be exclusively 
determined by the federal courts, will embrace a large portion 
of the citizens of every State, either as parties or witnesses. 

The numerous acts of bankruptcy described in the bill, many 
of which depend altogether upon the intention of the party 
charged with having committed them, would form the first ample 
source of exclusive federal jurisdiction. 



38 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

By the fifty-sixth section it is provided that any creditor of 
a bankrupt, appearing before the commissioners, may, at his elec- 
tion, have the vahdity of his claim determined in the circuit court 
of the district in which the bankrupt resides. The same privilege 
is extended to the assignees objecting to the validity of any claim 
upon the bankrupt, presented before the commissioners; in this 
manner every lawsuit which could arise in the settlement of a 
bankrupt's estate, respecting the demands of any of his creditors, 
would be drawn into the circuit court for decision. This would 
be the case whether he became a bankrupt voluntarily or by com- 
pulsion, and without any regard either to his occupation or place 
of residence, or that of his creditors. The whole structure of 
the national judiciary would thus be changed. It would then 
possess jurisdiction, not only over controversies arising between 
citizens of different States, but over an immense number of those 
existing between citizens of the same State. 

It W'OuId be tedious to enumerate, and perhaps impossible to 
foresee, all the controversies which, under the provisions of this 
bill, must exclusively be determined by the federal courts. The 
sixty-third section contains a sweeping clause upon this subject. 
It provides " that, except in the cases which are in this act other- 
wise specially provided for, if any bankrupt, or any assignee or 
assignees, creditor or creditors, or any other person, shall con- 
ceive himself, herself, or themselves, aggrieved by an examination, 
order, decision, denial, or other proceeding of the Commissioners, 
under any commission, or any act, proceeding, refusal, neglect, 
or omission of the bankrupt, or any assignee or assignees, or credi- 
tor or creditors, under, or by virtue of this act," such person may 
petition the circuit court, for the district where the commission 
issued, or either of its judges, for relief. The court, or the 
judge, is then bound to take cognizance of the complaint, and, at 
the election of either party, direct any facts in controversy to be 
tricfl by a jury. 

In the State of Pennsylvania there are but two district courts 
of the United States, the one located in the city of Philadelphia, 
the other in the city of Pittsburg. The distance between these 
two places is three hundred miles. The inconvenience and ex- 
pense to the people, from every section of the State of attending 
those two courts, as parties, and as witnesses, would be an intol- 
erable grievance. Under the provisions of this bill, however, 
such attendance inust necessarily be a matter of daily occurrence. 
The people are already sufficiently harassed, by being obliged to be 



1822] THE BANKRUPTCY BILL 39 

present at the courts within their own counties; but, if you 
compel them to travel to the federal courts, from one extremity 
of a large State to the other, it would be an evil scarcely to be 
endured. The same inconveniences will still exist in every other 
State in the Union, but they will be felt in a greater degree by 
the people of the larger States. This is another radical objection 
against the passage of a bankrupt bill by Congress. It is one 
which cannot be removed, because it results from the organization 
of the federal courts under the Constitution, and the allotment 
of judicial power between them and the courts of the several 
States. It demonstrates, however, that the power to pass bank- 
rupt laws could be exercised by the States much more conveniently 
for the people, than by the General Government. 

Another serious objection to the passage of the bill is its 
manifest tendency to increase the perpetration of fraud. It is 
true it has been strenuously maintained by its friends, that it will, 
in a great degree, repress that evil. Has the experience of Eng- 
land justified them in making this prediction? Does not the testi- 
mony which has been taken before the committee of the House 
of Commons prove clearly the contrary? Indeed so pressed down 
with its weight was my honorable colleague (Mr. Sergeant) that 
he was obliged to attribute the innumerable frauds which had 
been committed under the bankrupt law of that country, not to 
the operation of th*e law itself, but to the general corruption that 
prevailed among the people. This bill, should it become a law, 
must be productive of innumerable frauds, unless it will have the 
power of changing the nature of man, and rendering him the less 
criminal because he is the more tempted. He who created man, 
and therefore best knew his heart, directed him to pray that he 
might not be led into temptation. This bill informs the debtor 
that, if he will conform to its provisions, he shall obtain a certifi- 
cate which will discharge him from all his debts. The State in- 
solvent laws declare to him that, when he has given up all his 
property for the use of his creditors, he has done no more than 
his duty, and that his future acquisitions shall be answerable 
until his debts are paid. If a debtor can pass the ordeal of this 
bankrupt law, and obtain his certificate, he may then in security 
enjoy that property which successful fraud has enabled him to 
conceal. Under the State insolvent laws, however, he must know 
that the moment his concealed property is brought to light, it is 
liable to be seized by his creditors. Whilst, therefore, a bank- 
rupt law holds out every temptation to make the debtor dishonest, 



10 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

an insolvent law presents him no such inducement. Indeed, his 
true iK)h"cy is (Hrectly the reverse. Upon his good and fair con- 
duct, and the consequent favorable regard of his creditors, depend 
his hopes of a discharge. 

It is true, that by this bill a bankrupt cannot obtain a dis- 
charge from all his debts, unless by the consent of two-thirds 
of his creditors in number and value. In theory this would 
appear to present a considerable difficulty in the way of obtaining 
a certificate. In practice, under the English bankrupt laws, it 
has been found more nominal than real. Indeed, but few in- 
stances have, I believe, occurred in the history of their bankrupt 
laws, in which consent has not been obtained. In this country, 
under our judiciary system, it would, perhaps, be still easier for 
the bankrupt to escape from his debts. He himself, if he be 
fraudulently disposed, can, by his own act, create as many credi- 
tors as he chooses. If the assignees or the other creditors think 
proper to dispute the claims of those believed to be fraudulent, 
they may insist upon having a trial by jury before the circuit court. 
Where the bankrupt has little or no property to divide, as would 
be the case in most instances, neither his assignees nor honest 
creditors would incur the expense and trouble of carrying on 
a lawsuit, perhaps a hundred miles from home, to disprove any 
debt presented before the commissioners. Even should they 
think proper to do so, it would be difficult to accomplish it, if 
the fraud had been conducted with any art ; because, in the law, 
fraud is never to be presumed, but must be clearly proved. 

The evils which would flow from the retrospective opera- 
tion of this bill I shall not touch; they have already been ably 
and elocpicntly descanted upon by others. 

I shall now come to my concluding argument against the 
passage of this bill. It would tend again to arouse the spirit 
of wild and extravagant speculation, which has spread distress far 
and wide over the land. It will tend again to produce those very 
evils for which its friends say it is intended to provide a remedy. 
What has been the history of this country ? Upon this subject, let 
us not turn a deaf ear to the dictates of experience. It is the best 
teacher of political wisdom. 

Under our glorious Constitution, the human mind is unre- 
strained in the pursuit of happiness, the calm of despotism does 
not rest upon us. Neither the institutions of the country, nor 
the habits of society, have established any castes within the limits 
of which man shall be confined. The human intellect walks 



1822] THE BANKRUPTCY BILL 41 

abroad in its majesty. This admirable system of government, 
which incorporates the rights of man into the Constitution of the 
country, develops all the latent resources of the intellect, and 
brings them into active energy. The road to wealth and to honor 
is not closed against the humblest citizen — and Heaven forbid that 
it ever should be ! 

It is, however, the destiny of man to learn that evil often 
treads closely upon the footsteps of good. The very liberty which 
we enjoy, unless we are restrained by the dictates of morality 
and of prudence, has a tendency to make us discontented with 
our condition. It often produces a restless temper, and a disposi- 
tion to be perpetually changing our pursuits, for the purpose of 
becoming more wealthy or more distinguished. The frame of 
mind produced by freedom, if kept within proper bounds, is a 
source of the greatest advantages to individuals and to society: 
if unrestrained, and suffered to run wild, it leads to every species 
of extravagance and folly. 

A few merchants, both in the cities and in the country, have 
amassed splendid and princely fortunes. These have glittered in 
the fancy of the thoughtless and unsuspecting countryman, and 
have roused his ambition or his avarice. He never calculated 
that it requires a union of considerable parts with great experience 
to make an accomplished merchant; and that, with all these 
advantages, but few comparatively are successful. His son is 
taught book-keeping at a country school, and then he abandons 
the pursuit of his fathers. He leaves the business of agriculture, 
which is the most peaceful, the most happy, the most independent, 
and, I might add, the most respectable, in society, to become a 
merchant. He spurns the idea of treading in the path of his 
ancestors, and acquiring his living by the sweat of his brow. 
Wealth and distinction have become his idols, and have turned 
his brain. Is not this the history of thousands in our country 
within the last twenty years ? It was not difficult to predict what 
would be the melancholy catastrophe. Bankruptcy and ruin have 
fallen upon the thoughtless adventurers. 

Happy would it have been for the country had this spirit of 
speculation confined itself to the farmer who turned merchant. 
We have witnessed it spreading over every class of the com- 
munity. We have, in innumerable instances, seen the plain, 
sober, industrious, and inexperienced farmer, converted into a 
speculator in land and in stocks. We have lived in a time when 
the foundations of society appeared to be shaken, and when 



42 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

tlic love of gain seemed to swallow up every other passion of the 
heart. This disposition gave birth to the hundreds and thou- 
sands of banks, wliich have spread themselves over the country. 
Their reaction upon the people doubled the force of the original 
cause whicli produced them. They deluged the country with 
bank paper. The price of land rose far beyond its real value; 
it commanded from $200 to $400 per acre in many parts of the 
district wliich I have the honor, in part, to represent ; and I know 
one instance in which a man agreed to give $1,500 per acre for a 
tract of land, which he afterwards laid out in town lots. He sold 
the lots at so large a profit, that he would have accumulated an 
independent fortune by the speculation, had not the times 
ciiangcd and the lot-holders in consequence been unable to pay 
the purchase money. 

This universal delusion has vanished ; the enchantment is at 
an end ; the people have been restored to their sober senses. In 
the change, which was rapid, many honest and respectable citizens 
have been ruined. Among many, misery and want have usurped 
the abodes of happiness and plenty. I most sincerely deplore their 
situation ; but, as legislators, we should also have some compas- 
sion upon the community. Experience has taught us a lesson 
which, I trust, we shall never forget — that a wild and extravagant 
spirit of speculation is one of the greatest curses that can pervade 
our country. Do you wish again to rouse it? Do you wish 
again to witness the desolation which it has spread over the land, 
and which we are now slowly repairing? Then pass this bank- 
rupt bill ! Inform the farmer, who is now contented and happy, 
and whom experience has taught the danger of entering into trade, 
that he may become a merchant or a land jobber; that he may 
proceed to any excess he thinks proper; that he need confine the 
extravagance of his speculations within no other limit but the 
extent of his credit; that if, at last, he should be successful, un- 
bounded wealth will be his portion ; if not, the law will discharge 
him from all his debts, and enable him to begin a new career. 
Mold out a lure to all the industrious classes in society to abandon 
their useful and honorable pursuits, and enter into speculation 
of some kind or other, by proclaiming it as the law that, if they 
should prove unsuccessful, their debts shall be cancelled, and they 
?hrdl be restored to their former situation. Such a law would 
present the strongest temptations to every man in society to be- 
come indolent and extravagant, because every man in society is 
embraced by its provisions. In this respect it is as novel as it is 



1822] THE EXCHANGE OF STOCKS 43 

dangerous. Rest assured, Mr. Speaker, that our population 
require the curb more than the rein. If you hold out such encour- 
agement to unbounded speculation as this bill presents, we shall, 
before many years, see all the occurrences again presented before 
us which have involved the country in unexampled distress. 

The time may come, in ages hence, when a bankrupt law may 
become necessary for the encouragement of commerce. History 
has instructed us that nations, like men, rise, and flourish, and 
decay. At present our population possesses all the vigor and 
enterprise of youth. The stimulus of such a bill would drive us 
on to madness. It would be putting into the hands of Phaeton 
the reins of the chariot of the sun. The day will come, but I 
trust it is now far distant, when old age shall fall upon us as a 
nation, when wealth shall beget luxury and corruption, and when 
we shall be enfeebled in all our exertions. Then it may be neces- 
sary to hold out extraordinary allurements to commercial enter- 
prise. When that day shall arrive; when our country shall be 
sinking into decline; when her energies shall be paralysed; and 
when, perhaps, a new Republic, vigorous as ours is at present, 
may be her competitor in commerce, then, and not till then, 
will it be necessary that Congress should exercise the power vested 
in them by the Constitution, and pass uniform laws on the subject 
of bankruptcies. 



REMARKS, MARCH 21, 1822, 

ON THE EXCHANGE OF STOCKS.* 

Mr. Buchanan said, he felt it to be his duty to express his 
decided opinion in favor of the amendment of the gentleman from 



^Annals of Congress, 17 Cong, i Sess. 1821-1822, II. 1344-1345. 

Mr. Cambreleng's amendment, which had been voted down in Committee 
of the Whole, proposed to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to issue 
not exceeding $26,000,000 of 5 per cent, stock in exchange for 6 per cent, 
and 7 per cent, stocks previously issued. The holders of the 6 per cent, 
and 7 per cent, stocks were to be allowed to subscribe for the 5 per cent, 
stock between May 1 and August i, 1822, specifying the terms on which 
they would make the exchange; and the Secretary of the Treasury was to 
be authorized to accept such offers as he might deem advantageous to the 
United States, the exchange to be effected by a surrender of the old certifi- 
cates and the payment into the Treasury of the premium, if any, offered in 
consideration of the exchange. The amendment was carried in the House 
by a vote of 109 to 38. 



U 11 1 1: WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

New York, (Mr. Cambreleng. J However unpromising might 
be its prospect of success, he was so firmly convinced it ought 
to succeed, he would briefly state his reasons for his opinion. 
'J'lie principle of the bill, said Mr. B., is unexceptionable. If we 
could pay the debt, when it shall become due, that would be the 
must politic course. This is admitted to be impossible, even by 
those who are the most sanguine in their calculations respecting 
the revenue. After the $26,000,000 shall have been exchanged 
under the provision of this bill, the remainder of the war loans 
will be more than we will be able to pay as they become due. It 
therefore becomes a wise and prudent people to provide, in time, 
the means of keeping up the credit of the Government. We can 
now do this, and save, at the very least, an annual expenditure 
of interest of $260,000 from the time when the bill shall go into 
operation. The question, however, now is, between the first 
section of the present bill and the proposed amendment. Mr. 
B. said he was in favor of the latter. The universal peace which 
followed the general war throughout Europe, had opened the 
avenues of trade to all nations. By that means much of the 
capital of our merchants had been driven from commerce, and 
was vested in the public funds. The price of money became 
cheap, because we had much more than was demanded to carry 
on our commerce. Trade has, however, been lately reviving, and 
the demand for money is becoming greater. Should we realize 
all the benefits from declaring the South American provinces inde- 
pendent, which we anticipate, and should other events transpire, 
which are at least probable, new channels of trade will be opened 
to our commercial enterprise. Delay upon this subject may there- 
fore be dangerous. We have every reason to believe that the 
exchange could now be effected upon very advantageous terms — 
what will l>e the state of the money market by October next, it 
is impossible to foresee. The amendment contemplates that 
proposals shall be received by the Secretary of the Treasury from 
and after the first of May next; the original section, not until 
October. In this respect. Mr. B. thought the amendment prefer- 
able to the bill as it then stood. The chairman of the Committee of 
Ways and Means had thought the bill should not go into opera- 
tion until the ist of October next, that the foreign holders of stock 
might have an opportunity of taking advantage of its provisions. 
Mr. B. said, he could not perceive upon what principle we should 
enrlanger the success of the bill, by waiting until they might have 
an opportiniity of subscribing. He also preferred the amendment 



1822] THE EXCHANGE OF STOCKS 45 

for another reason. The five per cent, stock of the Government 
was now selling in the market at an advance higher, by between 
three and four per cent., than the six per cent, stocks redeemable 
in 1825 and 1826. The bill, as it at present stands, will give the 
benefit of this premium to the stockholders of the Government, 
at the public expense. Why should we extend these advantages 
to any description of men in the community? We should be 
just; it cannot be expected we will be generous to the public credi- 
tors; because, by acting in this manner, we injure our con- 
stituents. A premium of three per cent, on the $26,000,000, 
proposed to be exchanged by this bill, would amount to $780,000. 
I hope the House are not prepared to give this large sum, without 
any equivalent, to the holders of the public stock. The amend- 
ment can do no harm. The Secretary has no power to make 
a worse bargain, under its authority, than that of the original 
bill ; he may, however, and in all human probability will, make 
one that is much better. This bill, as it stands at present, presents 
a singular incongruity. The six per cent, stock, due in 1824 
and in 1825, is placed on the same footing, and yet the one is 
clearly more valuable than the other. They must both be ex- 
changed for five per cent, stock on the same terms, and it is out of 
the power of the Secretary to make a different bargain in the 
one case from the other. Mr. B. said he believed, if the amend- 
ment were adopted, it would be a clear saving to the country of 
between half a million and a million dollars ; and, under that 
impression, he would call for the yeas and nays, that his vote 
might be recorded in the affirmative. 



REMARKS, MARCH 30, 1822, 

ON THE EXCHANGE OF STOCKS.! 

Mr. Buchanan observed, that, although the bill before the 
House, even as it had been amended, did not please him in all 
its details, yet, imperfect as it was in his estimation, he deemed it 
in principle to be a measure so advantageous to the country that 
it should receive his decided support. The gentleman from Ken- 
tucky (Mr. Johnson) has complained that the friends of retrench- 
ment, of whom he professed to be one of the most zealous, were 
denounced as radicals and enemies of the present Administration. 



^Annals of Congress, 17 Cong, i Sess. 1821-1822, II. 1429-1432. 



k; 



Tin: WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 



.Mr. r>. was utterly at a loss to know what application such 
rc-niarks had to the subject under discussion. If they had any, 
for one he could observe, that denunciations of this kind would 
have no terrors for him. He neither desired nor expected any 
favor from the Administration; and he trusted that, whilst he 
held the high and honorable station of a Representative of the 
people, he should neither wish nor ask for any other distinction. 
He was, therefore, alike indifferent whether he was called a 
radical or an ultra. 

Mr. B. said, that the present amount of the national debt 
might be stated, for the sake of even numbers, at $93,000,000. 
$63,000,000 of this sum is the balance of the war loans yet re- 
maining unpaid, and bearing an interest of six and seven per cent, 
per annum. This balance will be redeemable at the pleasure of the 
Government, in the years 1825, 1826, 1827, and 1828. The 
measure proposed by the present bill is an exchange of $26,000,- 

000 of this stock, upon which the Government now pays an inter- 
est of six and seven per cent, for stock to that amount, bearing 
an interest of five per cent, and not redeemable until 1830, 1831, 
1832, and 1833. This exchange, in all human probability, can 
now be effected. The only question, therefore, to be decided, 
is the policy of the measure. 

It is said by its enemies that this bill should not pass, because 
it will deprive the Government of the power of redeeming 
$26,000,000 of the public debt, during the years in which it will 
become due. If the slightest prospect existed that we should be 
able to pay the $63,000,000, during those years, then, said Mr. B., 

1 admit this would be a conclusive objection to the bill. Un- 
questionably we should not deprive ourselves of the opportunity 
of discharging our debts, whenever we shall have the ability. 
But does any gentleman, however sanguine he may be in his cal- 
culations, really believe that our revenue, during the years 1825, 
1826, 1827, and 1828, will be sufficient to defray the current 
expenses of the Government, to pay the interest of the whole of 
the national debt, and sink $63,000,000 of the principal? Dur- 
ing each of the two last years our debt has been increased upwards 
of $2,000,000 ; and the Secretary of the Treasury, in his annual 
report, has informed us, that until 1825, the year when the first 
of the war loans may be redeemed, he does not calculate that our 
ordinary receipts will enable him to do more than meet the 
ordinary expenses of Government, the interest of the national 
debt, and the payment to the public creditors of the small balance 



i 



1822] THE EXCHANGE OF STOCKS 47 

yet unpaid of the deferred six per cent, stock. That officer, 
we are informed by the Chairman of the Committee of Ways and 
Means, now believes, from the late improvement in the revenue, 
that the $2,000,000 of six per cent, stock owned by the Bank 
of the United States, may also be discharged during the inter- 
mediate years. This, however, is the utmost extent, beyond 
which our most sanguine expectations have not carried us. 

If you should delay making such a provision as that con- 
templated by this bill until 1825, what will then be your situation? 
During that and the three subsequent years, you will either have 
a debt of $63,000,000 to discharge, or you will be compelled 
to pay for it an interest of six per cent. If you pay the amount, 
you must provide the means, by resorting to loans; and your 
necessities will then compel you to borrow so much at once, that 
the value of money will be raised in the market and you will not 
be able to obtain it at so cheap a rate as it can now be procured. 
Is it not, therefore, infinitely more politic to make the contem- 
plated exchange of $26,000,000 at the present time, when it 
can be done upon advantageous terms, than, under existing cir- 
cumstances to trust to the future ? 

Should this exchange be effected to its full extent there will 
still remain $37,000,000, which we may pay in 1825, 1826, 1827, 
and 1828; upwards of $9,000,000 each year. This sum so 
greatly exceeds that portion of the Sinking Fund applicable to 
the payment of the principal of the debt during those years, even 
should it be in operation to the full extent at present contem- 
plated by law, that we shall then be obliged to borrow large 
sums of money. This bill is calculated to divide the pressure. 
Let us now make an exchange of a part upon good terms; and 
by doing so we shall secure to ourselves infinitely better terms for 
the balance in 1825, 1826, 1827, and 1828, than we could other- 
wise expect. 

Mr. B. said, he believed this to be the auspicious moment 
for making the exchange. Trade is reviving and the demand 
for money becoming consequently greater. Should we realize 
the commercial advantages which we expect from our declaration, 
that the South American provinces are free and independent, 
new avenues will be opened for mercantile enterprise, and for the 
employment of that capital which now remains idle. The interest 
of money must rise as the demand for it increases. On the other 
hand, if Spain should, in violation of the principles of justice and 
of the laws of nations, declare war against us for recognizing 



48 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

the independence of her colonies, or even threaten it, the neces- 
sary result must be a depression in the price of your stocks. The 
experience of every country, in a state of actual or probable war, 
proves the truth of this position. This, then, appears to be the 
favorable time which, if we suffer to pass away, may never again 
return. 

The immediate effect of this exchange will be an annual sav- 
ing of $260,000. My friend from Kentucky, said Mr. B., who 
is so laudably desirous of introducing economy in the expenditure 
of public money, should have included this item in his calculations. 

The present bill, we have been informed by the chairman 
of the Committee of Ways and Means, is a financial measure of 
the Secretary of the Treasury. Now, although the opinion of 
that officer, even in matters of finance, should not be authority ; 
yet, from his character and official station, it is entitled to much 
weight. When there is doubt — when the judgment is nearly 
balanced, it should at least turn the scale. If Congress reject 
this measure, thus recommended, and if we shall be compelled 
to accept much worse terms in 1825 than the bill proposes, our 
constituents would have a just right to complain of our conduct. 

It has been urged that the provisions of this bill are im- 
moral in their nature, and will tend to introduce a system of 
wagering on future contingencies. It appears to me, however, 
that there is not the slightest foundation for this objection. 
Would the most rigid casuist consider, that the man who had 
borrowed money some years ago at the rate of six per cent, per 
annum, which will become due three years hence, is liable to an 
imputation of dishonesty if now, when money is worth less than 
five per cent., he offers to his creditor to extend the time of 
payment to eight years, provided he will accept that rate of inter- 
est from the date of the arrangement. This is precisely the pro- 
posal of Government as contained in the present bill. 

Mr. B. concluded, by expressing his decided opinion that, 
in whatever view this bill could be presented it would be beneficial 
to the country, and, therefore, he hoped it might pass. 



1822] THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 49 

REMARKS, APRIL 9, 1822, 

ON A PROPOSED APPROPRIATION FOR THE REPAIR OF THE 

CUMBERLAND ROAD.i 

Mr. Buchanan said, he should make no apology for rising 
to address the House upon the present occasion. The character 
of Pennsylvania, he said, had been attacked, and her views had 
been misrepresented, by honorable gentlemen upon this floor; 
and he should feel himself utterly unworthy of the trust reposed 
in him, as one of her representatives, if, after what had been 
said, he were not to stand forth in her defence. 

As it often happened, said Mr. B., that men are most afflicted 
by imaginary diseases, so it occurs that they most dread imaginary 
dangers. This has been the case with the gentleman from Ten- 
nessee, (Mr. Jones.) He has been grappling with the State 
of Pennsylvania, as though she stood ready to hurl the mountain 
into the Cumberland road, described by the gentleman from 
Maryland, (Mr. Bayly,) and he were the Atlas who could sus- 
tain it upon his shoulders, and thus make the attempt unavailing. 
This fancy of the gentleman has produced an excellent speech. 
Indeed, without much imagination and ardor of feeling, there 
can be but little eloquence. Let me, however, assure that gentle- 
man and this House, that neither Pennsylvania nor her represen- 
tatives dream of the destruction of the Cumberland road. 

The gentleman from Tennessee, (Mr. Jones,) and the gentle- 
man from Kentucky, (Mr. Hardin,) have ingeniously attempted 
to connect the grant of this appropriation with the preservation 
or destruction of this road. They have asked us if we will 
now destroy that great national work — if we will close the avenues 
which keep the intercourse open between the East and the West. 
I answer we will not. We all admit that the road should be 
preserved. The question now to be determined by this House 
is not whether the road shall be destroyed, but by whom shall 
it be repaired, whether by the United States or by the people 
who use, and for whose benefit it was constructed. 

The National Government have made the road at an expense 



* Annals of Congress, 17 Cong, i Sess. 1821-1822, II. 1503-1508. 

February 19, 1823, Buchanan offered an amendment to a pending bill, 
to cede to Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia the parts of the road lying 
within their limits on condition that they keep it in repair. (Annals of 
Congress, 17 Cong. 2 Sess. 1822^1823, 1063.) 

4 



50 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

of $1,000,000. Notwithstanding all that has been said by gen- 
tlemen about the existence of a compact for that purpose, it now 
appears that five-sixths of this enormous expenditure has been 
pure bounty. It has been stated, and not contradicted, that the 
two per cent, upon the whole amount of the sales of lands of 
Ohio, which was the sum pledged for the purpose of making a 
road, does not exceed $300,000. The United States then, in 
the construction of the Cumberland road, have been actuated 
by the most liberal policy towards the people of the West. 

What has been the principal argument urged by gentlemen, 
friendly to this appropriation, to induce us to keep the road in 
repair? In my opinion it is one of the most wonderful which 
has ever been presented to this House. Say they, because you 
have made the road, you should, therefore, be at the expense of 
supporting it. Is not this a conclusion directly the reverse of 
one which would naturally flow from the premises ? If we have 
been so generous as to make a road for you, ought you not, at 
least, to keep it in repair? If tolls could not be collected upon it 
sufficient for its preservation, there would be some force in the 
argument. This, however, is not pretended. Indeed we should 
be almost induced to believe, from the representations of its 
friends, if we did not know to the contrary, that it was the only 
road which connects the West with the East. 

In what estimation would an individual be held who had 
received as a free gift a valuable farm, if, when, in the lapse of 
time, it needed repairs, he should demand from his benefactor 
the sum which they might cost, and assign his generosity in con- 
ferring the original bounty, as a reason why he was bound to 
satisfy this new claim? The present is a case precisely parallel 
with the one now before the House, so far as it goe's. The 
gentleman from Kentucky, (Mr. Hardin,) and the gentleman 
from Tennessee, (Mr. Jones,) have gone still further, and have 
attributed, not only to my colleagues who have heretofore ad- 
dressed you on this subject, but to the State of Pennsylvania 
generally, a selfish and illiberal policy, because they have resisted 
this unreasonable demand. With what justice the charge has 
been made remains for this House to determine. 

Gentlemen have instituted comparisons between the amount 
of public money expended for the benefit of the people in the 
East and in the West. As a present consolation for the disparity 
in this respect, which the gentleman from Kentucky, (Mr. Hardin,) 
supposes to exist in favor of the East, he has predicted that the 



1822] THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 51 

day will ere long arrive when the weight of power shall be 
transferred to the West. It is because my feelings are all friendly 
to that portion of our Union that I dislike to hear such sentiments 
from sources so respectable. Gentlemen, without intending it, 
I am convinced, have been thus endeavoring to excite jealousies 
between people whose feelings and whose common interest are 
both precisely the same. 

With what justice has it been contended by gentlemen, that 
the money expended in the construction of a navy, has been 
exclusively for the benefit of the eastern section of the Union? 
Although it is now generally admitted that a navy is the best 
defence for all parts of the Union, yet it is peculiarly the bulwark 
of the country west of the Alleghany mountains. The extent 
of coast upon the Atlantic would render it impracticable for any 
hostile naval force altogether to prevent us from sending a por- 
tion of our produce to market ; but let the mouth of the Missis- 
sippi be blockaded by a force of that description, superior to our 
own, and I ask what will become of all the surplus agricultural 
productions of the vast and fertile valley watered by that river 
and its tributary streams ? The truth is, we are all so connected 
together by our interest, as to place us in a state of mutual de- 
pendence upon each other, and to make that which is for the 
interest of any one member of the federal family beneficial, in 
most instances, to all the rest. We never can be divided without 
first being guilty of political suicide. The prosperity of all the 
States depends as much upon their Union as the human life 
depends upon that of the soul and the body. 

The State of Pennsylvania, about the illiberality of whose 
views on this subject so much has been said, never has acted 
towards you in the manner those interested in the Cumberland 
road have done. Had you advanced us the money to construct a 
road which would have been advantageous to our citizens gener- 
ally, you should never afterwards have been asked to advance 
money to keep it in repair. We should have considered such a 
request both ungrateful and unjust. The citizens of that State, 
with the aid which she liberally bestowed, have already completed 
eighteen hundred and seven miles of turnpike road, of which 
about twelve hundred and fifty are of solid stone. Laws have 
been passed for the construction of seven hundred and fourteen 
miles more. The State has expended upon these objects $1,361,- 
542, and individuals $4,158,347. One of these roads runs nearly 
parallel with the Cumberland road, and connects the city of Phila- 



52 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

delphia with that of Pittsburg. The gentleman from Tennessee, 
two years ago, found this road to be a bad one. The temper of 
mind with which people travel has a wonderful effect upon their 
judgment of the road, and I fear this cause has operated, in no 
small degree, upon the mind of my honorable friend. 

It is expected that this road, as well as all others of the same 
kind in Pennsylvania, shall not only support itself, but yield 
some small dividend upon the stock subscribed for its construction. 
I ask, then, with what justice towards that State can you repair 
the Cumberland road out of the Treasury, and make it perfectly 
free? Even after you shall have placed toll gates upon it, there 
will be no fair competition. No more toll will be collected upon 
it than will be necessary for its preservation, whilst our road, in 
addition to that amount, must pay an interest to the State, and to 
the stockholders. With what propriety, then, can Pennsylvania 
be censured for maintaining the principle that those who travel 
upon the Cumberland road, and are most interested in its preser- 
vation, should keep it in repair. She does not deserve, at your 
hands, that you should give a premium out of the public treasury, 
for the purpose of diverting travellers away from her road, and 
inducing them to use another which is in no respect superior. 
It will not be denied but that, in times of trial, she has both fought 
and paid with as much alacrity as any other State in the Union. 

Notwithstanding all that has been said, I believe, as firmly 
as I do in my existence, that the friends of this road might with 
safety retrocede it to Pennsylvania. It would not be delivering 
up the lamb to the wolf, to use the expression of an honorable 
gentleman. Pennsylvania is now no more governed by a selfish 
policy, than when she ceded to the United States the soil over 
which the road passes. She then understood her true interest 
as well as now. There certainly has been nothing in her conduct 
since, which could induce a rational belief that she would destroy 
this great public work, if it were placed in her power. In that 
case she would do nothing more than impose a toll upon it, suf- 
ficient to create a fair competition between it and her own road ; 
and then leave the public to decide which they would use. We 
do not, however, ask for a retrocession; all we desire is, that the 
road may hereafter support itself, and not be a perpetual drain 
upon the public treasury. 

The existence of this road, I can assure gentlemen, is not a 
subject of such alarm to the State of Pennsylvania, nor to her 
metropolis, as they suppose. Whilst Philadelphia shall deserve 



1822] THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 53 

the character which she has so justly acquired for commercial 
integrity, she will always find customers in the West, no matter 
over what road they may travel. Her experience has already 
proved the truth of this assertion. It is devoutly to be wished, 
both for the sake of her merchants and those of the West, that, 
hereafter, the latter may be able to comply with their contracts 
better than they have done heretofore. In making this observa- 
tion, I have not the most remote intention of giving offence, 
because I know that the pecuniary embarrassments of people of 
the West arose from causes, the operation of which they did not 
at first foresee, and could not afterwards control. 

We have all, then, arrived at this conclusion, that the road 
shall not be suffered to go to ruin. Whatever doubts may at 
present be entertained, either of the policy of its original con- 
struction or location, about which I have my own opinion, we 
must not now allow it to be destroyed. Before toll can with 
justice be demanded from travellers, it must be repaired. The 
mountain, which it is said has slid down into it, must be removed. 
From motives of generosity to the people of the West, and not 
of justice, I am, therefore, free to acknowledge, that I am willing 
a provision shall be introduced into the bill for the collection 
of tolls, appropriating to the road this unexpended balance of 
$9,194.25. After, however, we shall have given them that 
amount and our blessing, it should be explicitly understood, that 
we shall never again hear any more demands for money from that 
quarter on the same account. 

It may be asked why I am unwilling to make the appropria- 
tion in the present bill ? For this, I will briefly state my reasons. 
The first is, that if the appropriation were once made, we have 
good reason for apprehending we should not again, during the 
present session, hear anything about the collection of toll. It is 
at least certain that the friends of the road would not then be 
very anxious for the consideration of the bill providing for that 
object. We know that one of the gentlemen from Ohio, (Mr. 
Campbell,) who spoke upon this subject, avowed his opinion 
that the General Government should always support this road out 
of the public treasury. I would, therefore, make a provision for 
the collection of toll, and the appropriation of this unexpended 
balance as inseparable as man and wife. I know they are un- 
willing companions, and I dread that, if the one should get the 
start of the other, it would be difficult ever to unite them. 

Another reason which operates forcibly upon my mind is, 



54 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1822 

that this donation has been introduced into the general appro- 
priation bill for the support of Government. The impropriety 
of this course will appear manifest from considering the character 
of that measure. Its legitimate purpose is to provide for expenses 
which either have been, or will be, incurred under the authority 
of existing laws, or in pursuance of the well established policy 
of the country. The principle now to be decided by the House 
is entirely new. It is not as it was formerly, whether you will 
complete that which you have already commenced ; but whether, 
after having completed, you will keep the road in repair. Appro- 
priations for making the road were matters of course, after you 
had finally determined it should be constructed. The principle 
now before the House, however, being entirely new, should have 
been embraced in a distinct bill, and suffered to rest upon its 
own merits. When you legislate upon new subjects in a general 
appropriation bill, you give them an unfair advantage. You drag 
them along by the force of the bill to which they are attached; 
and, on its passage, you compel members either to vote in their 
favor, or to stop the wheels of Government. 

Upon the same principle that this provision has been intro- 
duced into the bill now before the House, you might introduce 
into it any other claim for money, whether of a public or a private 
nature. The consequences which would follow, from pursuing 
such a precedent, I need not detail to this House. 

In this case, the precedent would be infinitely the more 
dangerous, should the grant be introduced into the general appro- 
priation bill, for that very reason. It might then hereafter, with 
some degree of propriety, be considered as the settled policy of 
the country to support the road ; and as a pledge of the public 
faith that it shall be repaired out of the public Treasury. 

In every view, therefore, which this subject has presented 
to my mind, I have been led to the conclusion that we should 
concur with the Committee of the Whole in their report, and 
strike out this appropriation from the present bill. 



1822] THE WESTERN BOUNDARY 55 

REMARKS, APRIL 25, 1822, 

ON A PROPOSED APPROPRIATION FOR MARKING THE WESTERN BOUN- 
DARY OF THE UNITED STATES UNDER THE TREATY 
WITH SPAIN OF FEBRUARY 22, 1819.1 

Mr. Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, said, in reply to Mr. Allen's 
argument, that it was not a line that was to be fixed by the Com- 
missioners, that being done by the description of it in the treaty ; 
but it was a line to be marked. The national boundaries are 
specified in the treaty ; and all that the Commissioners can have 
to do is to mark the line which is thus specifically defined. The 
gentleman from Kentucky was perfectly correct, Mr. B. said, 
when he contended that the Mexican Government would be 
bound to run the line, as by its succession to the rights of old 
Spain, it had also succeeded to her duties. What then would 
be the proper mode of proceeding? Mr. B. objected, he said, 
to the appointment of a Commissioner to meet the Commissioner 
of Spain; and when he did that, he was as much in favor of 
observing the obligations of the treaty as any gentleman. Do 
we wish to violate this contract with Spain when we say we will 
not run this line in conjunction with her? No; we say, that 
Mexico has succeeded to the rights of Spain, and having done so, 
we are bound to carry the treaty into effect with the former, and 
not with the latter. We made our contract with Spain — how? 
As the sovereign over those territories. What has happened 
since? Why, it appears that the sceptre has passed from the 
hands of Spain, and not she but another power possesses the 
sovereignty. Mr. B. said he would just put one question, by 
way of illustration. Suppose, after this country was declared 
sovereign and independent during the Revolutionary war, a 
stipulation had been made between Great Britain and Spain to run 
our boundary line, would we have suffered our sovereignty to be 
violated with impunity? Or has any nation now a right to go 
into Texas or Mexico and run the boundary line? Surely not. 
This, Mr. B. said, was his view of the matter, and he believed 
it to be correct. He would, therefore, withhold the proposed 
appropriation; not that he would violate our engagement with 
Spain, but that he would perform it to the proper sovereign. 
There was so palpable an inconsistency between this appropria- 
tion and the recognition of the independence of Mexico, that he 
could not vote for it. 



* Annals of Congress, 17 Cong, i Sess. 1821-1822, II. 1663. 



56 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1823 

1823. 
SPEECH, FEBRUARY 7, 1823, 

ON THE NEW TARIFF BILL.' 

Mr. Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, said, the question now 
under discussion before the Committee, although one of consider- 
able consequence, had assumed an air of importance to which it 
was not entitled. The argument has proceeded, as though we 
were now about to decide whether we should change the settled 
policy of this country, in its intercourse with foreign nations, 
and adopt a system strictly prohibitory and restrictive; whether 
we should close our ports against all the nations of the earth, 
and sweep our foreign commerce from the ocean, for the purpose 
of encouraging our domestic manufactures. The imprudence 
of some of the friends of the bill, has given to its enemies a 
plausible pretext for this course of argument. The gentleman 
from Massachusetts (Mr. Gorham) has availed himself of this 
advantage. Instead of attacking the provisions contained in the 
bill, he has, ingeniously, and with a force of argument which I 
have rarely heard equalled, assailed some of the principles by 
which it has been supported. He has considered this as a ques- 
tion, whether we should at once abandon the policy under which 
we have been acting, from the adoption of the Federal Consti- 
tution, and substitute in its stead a restrictive system; and, if this 
were the true state of the case, he should have my hearty 
co-operation. 

Assuming these premises, that gentleman has presented be- 
fore us a number of horrid images, sufficient to startle the imag- 
ination, not as the creatures of his own fancy, which they truly 
are, but as the genuine production of the bill. He has declared 
that it is an attempt by one portion of the Union, for its own 
peculiar advantage, to impose ruinous taxes upon another. He 
has represented it as an effort to compel the agriculturists of 
the South to pay tribute to the manufacturers of the North ; he 
has proclaimed it to be a tyrannical measure. He has gone 
further, and boldly declared that the people of the South should 
resist such a law, and that they ought to resist it. After this 
wonderful display, would any one believe that the present measure 



* Annals of Congress, 17 Cong. 2 Sess. 1822-1823, 893-905. 



1823] THE NEW TARIFF BILL 57 

is dictated by the pecuniary necessities of the country, and tlie 
only question to be determined is — what are the most proper 
sources from which to derive additional revenue? The Secre- 
tary of the Treasury has done his duty, and disclosed to the 
nation the real situation of its finances. He has informed us 
that, in the year 1825, there will, in his opinion, be a deficiency, 
under the present system, of about $1,250,000, even after allow- 
ing a credit for the $8,000,000 which he estimates will, at the 
commencement of that year, be remaining in the Treasury, after 
paying the expenses of the preceding years. The gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Cambreleng) has, notwithstanding, de- 
clared, that we have an overflowing Treasury, and that there is 
no necessity for increasing our revenue. The Secretary and 
he are at issue on this point : and although I am disposed to give 
great credit to his opinions, particularly upon subjects of that 
nature, yet those of the distinguished officer, placed by your laws 
at the head of the Treasury, are entitled to still greater weight. 
Fortunately, however, this is a subject not involved in any 
mystery; but is one about which we can all judge. We know, 
from the report of the Committee of Ways and Means, made 
at the last session, that the proportion of our public debt which 
will be redeemable in the years 1825, 1826, 1827, and 1828, 
amounts to sixty-three millions seven hundred and eighty-six 
thousand one hundred and thirty-seven dollars and seventy-four 
cents. It is estimated by the Secretary, that, after applying the 
eight millions of dollars, which he expects will have accumulated 
in the Treasury on the first of January, 1825, towards the extin- 
guishment of the debt redeemable in that year, there will still 
remain a deficit of about $1,250,000. 

In what manner, then, do gentlemen propose to meet this 
deficiency? In what manner do they propose, not only to effect 
this purpose in 1825. but to pay upwards of forty-six million 
dollars of debt, which ought to be paid in the three succeeding 
years? In what estimation should that man's wisdom be held, 
who would fancy himself rich, and neglect to provide the means 
of discharging a debt of ten thousand dollars, which will not be 
payable till the year 1825, because he believes that in the mean- 
time his ordinary revenue will yield him five hundred dollars be- 
yond his ordinary expenses? This is precisely the situation of the 
Government ; and yet the respectable gentleman from New York 
has informed us that there is no necessity for providing any 
additional ways and means. 



58 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1823 

There can be no doubt but that every member of this Com- 
mittee will concur with me in opinion, that our debt ought, if 
possible, to be discharged as soon as it shall be redeemable. No 
one will contend that a public debt is a public blessing. The 
payment of the national debt is one of the best means of prepar- 
ing for war. The resources of the nation ought not to continue 
mortgaged to the public creditor; but they should be left entire, 
and ready to be applied at all times towards the defence of the 
country. This, at least, is my system of policy. 

Under this view of the subject, we are brought, irresistibly, 
to the conclusion, that revenue must be raised; at least, that it 
ought to be raised. The question, then, is, from what objects 
shall we derive the means necessary to extinguish the national 
debt ? It is admitted by all that a duty upon imports is the most 
economical and least oppressive mode of raising revenue. It is 
the mode most consonant to the feelings of a free people. It 
does not require the agency of the exciseman or the tax gatherer. 
The practice of the government for more than thirty years has 
sanctified this method in the minds of the people. They will not 
now readily submit to direct taxes, or to excises when the country 
is at peace. I say, emphatically, when the country is at peace; 
because I know that in times of actual war, or of approaching 
danger, the American people will cheerfully submit to any sacri- 
fices which may be necessary to provide for the common defence, 
and promote the security and the glory of the nation. 

The necessity of adopting a new tariff, for the purpose of 
raising revenue, has not only been stated by the Secretary of the 
Treasury, but he has distinctly recommended many of the articles 
on the importation of which additional duties should be imposed. 
These are all embraced in the provisions of the present bill, though 
the increase of duty is in several instances greater than what he 
recommended. Yet, notwithstanding its friends have declared 
their intention to amend it, and make it conform more nearly with 
that recommendation, this is the measure whose blasting influence, 
if adopted, gentlemen declare, will paralyze agriculture, ruin com- 
merce, and destroy the navy. Phantoms, the most deadly and 
destructive, have been presented before the Committee, as the nat- 
ural offspring of this measure. One would almost be led to be- 
lieve that the bill now under consideration was the true box of 
Pandora, from which, if enacted into a law, all the evils that can 
invade the human race would proceed. The gentlemen from 
Georgia and from Massachusetts (Mr. Tattnall and Mr. Gorham) 



1823] THE NEW TARIFF BILL 59 

have proclaimed it tyranny, and tyranny which ought to be re- 
sisted. Yet all this mighty conflagration has been raised to 
intimidate us from adopting a system, which in substance has 
been recommended by the intelligent and independent officer at the 
head of the Treasury, merely because in its indirect operation 
it may benefit certain necessary domestic manufactures. I con- 
fess I never did expect to hear inflammatory speeches of this kind 
within these walls, which ought to be sacred to union; I never 
did expect to hear the East counselling the South to resistance, 
that we might thus be deterred from prosecuting a measure of 
policy, urged upon us by the necessities of the country. If I 
know myself, I am a politician neither of the East, nor of the 
West, of the North, nor of the South : I therefore shall forever 
avoid any expressions, the direct tendency of which must be to 
create sectional jealousies, sectional divisions, and at length dis- 
union, that w^orst and last of all political calamities. 

The gentlemen will, I trust, be mistaken in their object. 
They will not be able, by calling this bill a prohibitory system, 
and by taking that for granted which has no existence, except in 
their own imagination, to deter its friends from pursuing a 
steady course in the accomplishment of their object. The gen- 
tleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. Gorham,) like the ancient 
Archimedes, only wants a place to stand upon; he could then 
move the world. If the bill really contained those destructive 
provisions which have been placed in terrible array before us, 
the whole American people would rise up with one consent against 
it; not in rebellion, because for that there could be no occasion; 
but in their sovereign character of voters, and discharge from the 
councils of the nation those Representatives who had trampled 
upon their dearest rights. 

I have now arrived at that point in the argument when it 
becomes necessary that I should declare to what extent I am will- 
ing, at this time, to proceed in the protection of domestic manu- 
factures. Upon this subject, I hope I shall not be misunder- 
stood. I think I have shown, that it is now necessary to increase 
our revenue from imposts. In selecting the objects of additional 
duty, I would do it with a view to the encouragement of such 
domestic manufactures as are necessary for the defence of the 
nation, and for the consumption of the great mass of your people ; 
and more particularly those articles of which your country fur- 
nishes the raw material in abundance. By this means, whilst you 
raise revenue, you indirectly, but gradually, encourage such man- 



60 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1823 

ufactiires as will render you more independent of foreign nations. 
The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Gorham) has asked, 
are we not independent when we purchase what we want from 
foreign nations, and pay them the price demanded? I answer, 
yes; but we would be much more independent if we could derive 
from our own manufactories those articles which are commonly 
called the necessaries of life, and those without which you cannot 
carry on war. When a nation is in this situation, she is prepared 
for a state of war, as well as of peace; she is prepared for the 
day of adversity, as well as the day of prosperity. Her neces- 
sary supplies are not then dependent upon the will of foreign 
Powers, who may be in a state of hostility against her; but she 
has her own resources under her own control. 

The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Gorham) has 
urged, as another argument against this bill, that it is a mere 
compromise, and that there is no one article on which an addi- 
tional duty could be imposed without the others. This may be 
true, and it ought to be true. The Federal Constitution was 
itself a compromise. Our Government extends over a vast ter- 
ritory ; and, therefore, in the selection of articles on which to im- 
pose additional duties, you should consult the advantage of every 
part. You should study equality, and scatter the advantages of 
your system as widely as possible. This is the only course of 
policy which will perpetuate harmony among all the States. It 
was by a combination of this nature, between the cotton growers 
of the South and the manufacturers of the North, that the intro- 
duction of coarse cottons into the country from abroad has been 
in effect prohibited, by the high rate of duties. Is it not, then, 
ungenerous for the South and the East to sound the tocsin of 
alarm and of resistance, when we wish to benefit the agriculture 
and manufactures of the Middle and the Western States in- 
directly, by the imposition of necessary duties? We do not ask 
the same encouragement for the growth and manufacture of any 
article, that has been afforded to that of cotton. For one, I 
desire at present no prohibitory duty on any other article. All 
that we ask of you is. that, as you must raise revenue, you should 
do it in such a manner as to give some indirect encouragement 
to the agriculture and manufactures of the middle portion of 
the Union. Give us a small share of the same advantages which 
we have freely concurred in bestowing upon you. 

This bill will make no change in the well settled policy of the 
country. It pursues the system under which this Union has 



1823] THE NEW TARIFF BILL 61 

tioiirished. The practice of the Government, for more than thirty 
years, has been gradually to encourage those domestic manu- 
factures most important to the country. We have moved along 
in this course, not rashly, but cautiously. The end has been 
the collection of revenue; in its attainment we have adopted a 
system of duties calculated to afford protection to our own 
manufactures, not for the purpose of prohibiting the importation 
of foreign fabrics, but to bring our own into fair competition with 
them. This policy, which accommodates itself to our circum- 
stances, is infinitely better than either the dreams of political econ- 
omists, who, on the one hand, would cast off every restriction, 
and open your ports to all the world, or the systems of those who, 
on the other, are so devotedly the friends of domestic manufac- 
tures, that they would sacrifice the commercial, and injure the agri- 
cultural interests of the country for their promotion. Experience 
is the best school of politics. The gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Gorham) has stated that, for the last twenty years, all the 
distinguished writers on political economy have denounced the 
restrictive system, and have advocated what has been called the 
" let us alone " policy. In answer to their theory, I will produce 
an experiment. The Emperor Alexander became a convert to 
these notions. In 1820 he adopted a new tariff, reducing the 
duties generally, and repealing most of the prohibitions. The 
ports of that vast empire were thrown open to all the merchants 
of the world. The golden age of modern political economists 
had arrived; they had made a convert, who had the power and 
the inclination to bring their system into practical effect. What 
were the consequences ? Two short years were sufficient for the 
experiment. In two short years Russia was reduced from a 
state of unexampled prosperity, to which she had attained by 
pursuing a contrary policy, to a state of unexampled depression. 
The edict was repealed ; a new tariff was adopted ; and it was 
declared by that Government that, under the operation of the 
tariff of 1820, "agriculture without a market, industry without 
protection, languish and decline. Specie is exported, and the 
most solid commercial houses are shaken." I would recommend 
to gentlemen a perusal of the whole of this admirable State paper, 
from which I have quoted but a few lines. 

The gentlemen have contended that, should this bill be 
adopted, the agricultural interest of the country will be greatly 
injured. If this were the case, it would be a conclusive objection 
to its passage. The farmers are the most useful, as they are the 



62 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1823 

most numerous class of society. No measure ought ever to be 
adopted by the government which would bear hardly upon them. 
They are the body of men among whom you may expect to find, 
in an eminent degree, that virtue w^ithout which your republican 
institutions could not continue to exist. Agriculture is the most 
noble employment of man. It communicates vigor to the body 
and independence to the mind. My constituents are principally 
farmers, and I should feel it both my duty and my inclination to 
resist any measure which would be pernicious to their interest. 

The agriculturists are the great body of consumers. It is 
from them that the revenue must principally be derived, no matter 
what may be the mode by which it is collected. They must 
equally pay it. whether in the shape of an excise, a land tax, or 
an impost upon the importation of foreign articles. I will never 
consent to adopt a general restrictive system, because that class 
of the community would then be left at the mercy of the manu- 
facturers. The interest of the many would thus be sacrificed 
to promote the wealth of the few. The farmer, then, in addition 
to the premium which he would thus be compelled to pay the 
manufacturer, would have also to sustain the expenses of the 
government. If this bill proposed a system which would lead to 
such abuses, it should not receive my support. 

I consider this bill as a revenue measure. Money must be 
collected — the public debt must be paid — and a large proportion 
of the money to pay it must come from the farmer. I have shown 
that the imposition of additional duties is the best and cheapest 
mode of collecting taxes. If, then, at the same time that the 
farmer is paying an additional duty to the Government in the 
increased price of the imported foreign articles which he con- 
sumes, the domestic manufacturer can, by that means, be enabled 
to enter into competition with the foreign manufacturer, in the 
home market, in what manner is the farmer injured? He is not 
only not injured, but he will be benefited. If, for example, the 
agriculturist, by paying a small additional duty for one or two 
years, can be certain then of purchasing domestic articles equally 
cheap with foreign: and if he can thus procure a home market 
for the products of his own industry, he is greatly the gainer by 
the measure. The loss, if any, which he would sustain at first, 
is amply compensated by the benefit at last. This was the case 
with respect to the duty imposed upon coarse cotton goods. Al- 
though the growers of cotton, and other consumers, may, in 
the beginning, have had to pay more for articles of this descrip- 
tion than formerly, yet the price is at present reduced lower than 



1823] THE NEW TARIFF BILL 63 

it ever was. The goods are so much better and cheaper than the 
foreign fabric, that they are now exported. The planters of the 
South have thus obtained a certain market in the North for their 
cotton ; not one liable to the fluctuations and the changes incident 
to the policy of foreign governments. The trade and the mutual 
dependence to which this measure has given birth, serve to tighten 
the bonds of union between these two portions of our country, 
and is, therefore, a political measure of great consequence. The 
planters of the South have thus become necessary to the manu- 
facturers of the North. And thus, if a wise and prudent system 
of policy shall be pursued, all the States will be indissolubly bound 
together by their interest, as well as their inclination. Nature 
has declared that our mutual wants, and our mutual means of 
gratifying them, shall bind this Republic together. Nothing but 
the mistaken policy of man can ever tear it asunder. 

The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Gorham) has 
argued as though the direct effect of this bill would be to destroy 
commerce, and to prostrate the Navy. If this were true, it would 
be a most powerful argument against it. The merchants are a 
respectable and useful class of men, and are entitled to the pro- 
tection of the Government. Without commerce, your Navy 
cannot exist. It is the only school in which sailors can be in- 
structed. The first lesson in politics which I ever learned was 
to admire the Navy. That which in the beginning was perhaps 
honest prejudice has now become rational conviction. The Navy 
is our best defence from external enemies ; it is our best security 
for perpetual union. The sailors of the Northern and Middle 
States are necessary to the prosperity of all the inhabitants of the 
vast valley of the Mississippi. The outlet of that river can only 
be preserved free and open by a naval force. I would not, there- 
fore, sacrifice the interests of commerce to promote manufac- 
tures. This bill will produce no such effect. Its operation in 
favor of manufactures will be gradual — almost imperceptible. 
The additional consumption from the rapid increase of our 
population will be equal, or nearly equal, to the increase of manu- 
factured articles. If at last any of the branches shall become so 
perfect in its kind as to exclude foreign articles of the same 
description, this will be the work of many years. In the mean- 
time, the commercial capital employed in that particular trade 
will find new channels. Speaking of this subject, the Secretary 
of the Treasury, in his annual report, says : 

" It is however presumed that the revenue will continue to 
be augmented by the proposed alterations in the tariff until the 



64 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1823 

public debt shall have been redeemed; after which, the public 
expenditure in time of peace will be diminished to the extent of 
the Sinking Fund, which is at present ten millions of dollars. 
But, if, contrar}^ to the present anticipations, the proposed aug- 
mentation of duties should, before the public debt be redeemed, 
produce a diminution of the revenue arising from the importation 
of those articles, a corresponding, if not a greater augmentation, 
may be confidently expected upon other articles imported into the 
United States. This supposition rests upon the two-fold con- 
viction that foreign articles nearly equal to the value of the 
domestic exports will be imported and consumed; and that the 
substitution of particular classes of domestic articles for those 
of foreign nations not only does not necessarily diminish the value 
of domestic exports, but usually tends to increase that value." 

There is one circumstance which will always serve to secure 
the merchants of the country against the manufacturers, and that 
is the necessity, in time of peace, of collecting our revenue from 
imposts. Should such a general prohibitory system be adopted 
in favor of domestic manufactures, as to make a resort to direct 
taxes necessary for the support of Government in time of peace, 
the reaction will be dreadful. The people would at once rise in 
their majesty, and legislate the evil out of existence. In this, 
however, their own true interest will compel the manufacturers 
to study the interest of the merchants. 

It has been said by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
Gorham) that if you impose additional duties on foreign articles, 
you thereby give to the domestic manufacturer a pledge which 
you can never in good faith withdraw. That, therefore, you 
cannot repeal laws of this nature, should they prove injurious. 
This conclusion I deny. The manufacturers must act upon the 
laws at their own peril. They are merely intended to plant those 
manufactures natural to our soil and to our country. After they 
have been fairly brought into existence, if they cannot support 
themselves without extraordinary duties, or, in other words, 
without continual contributions from the consumers, they must 
be abandoned by the Government. If any manufacture is dis- 
covered to be a mere hot-bed production — that cannot flourish in 
our climate without artificial warmth — it must be left to its fate. 
It is one of such a description as should never have been planted. 
In order to avoid this disagreeable alternative, however, we should 
be careful to legislate in favor of such branches of manufactures 
onlv as are congenial to our countrv. We have hitherto been 



1823] THE NEW TARIFF BILL 65 

eminently successful in this particular. The selection of cotton 
manufactures was judicious in the highest degree. They have 
now taken deep root, and can flourish against any foreign com- 
petition. If the case had been otherwise, the result would have 
shown that they ought not to have been brought into existence 
by the protection of our laws. 

Another powerful reason which exists for the passage of this 
bill, is, that the balance of trade for some years has been clearly 
against us. It is a notorious fact that specie, that Government 
stock, that Bank stock of the United States, and even the canal 
stock of the State of New York, — are rapidly leaving the country, 
to pay the debts which we owe in Great Britain. Our importa- 
tions have been extravagant, and should they continue so great, 
our wealth will be gradually drained from us, for the purpose of 
enriching foreign manufacturers. 

It has been said that this evil will correct itself. So it must ; 
but it will not be until the country is drained of its wealth, and our 
merchants can no longer obtain credit abroad. It will not be 
until we have got into a state of debt and depression, from which 
it will require years to recover. 

The gentleman from New York (Mr. Cambreleng) has 
declared, that the larger the balance of trade against us, the 
greater the evidence of our prosperity. This, taken literally, 
is a paradox, which I know the gentleman did not mean. His 
intention was to say, that the larger the apparent balance of trade 
was against us, on the books of the custom-house, the stronger 
the evidence of our prosperity. For example, suppose our ex- 
ports amount to $16,000,000, our imports to $20,000,000, his 
conclusion is, that our commercial capital, industry and enterprise, 
are worth imports to the value of $4,000,000, and that thus the 
account is balanced, and the country is enriched. This would 
be true, provided, at the end of the negotiation, we were clear 
of debt. Without showing that to be the case, this argument 
is merely begging the question. Let me put a case, which 
approaches much nearer to the truth. Suppose our exports to be 
but $16,000,000, our imports $20,000,000, and at the end of 
the year we are $2,000,000 in debt, how would the balance of 
the trade then stand? It would be precisely $2,000,000 against 
us. That this supposition approaches much more nearly to the 
real state of our foreign trade is evident, from the history of 
the country for the last few years. Is it not notorious, that our 
money and our stock are rapidly disappearing, notwithstanding 
5 



66 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1823 

all the value of our commercial capital and industry employed in 
foreign trade? I am not one of those political croakers, who 
judge of the balance of trade by the books of the custom-house. 
If any estimate formed upon them were true, our imports so far 
exceed our exports, that we are, and have been for years, driving 
on to ruin with dreadful rapidity. This, we know not to be 
the fact. To our imports must be added, all the value of our com- 
mercial industry and enterprise, when we would compare tliem 
with our exports, for the purpose of ascertaining the true balance 
of trade. Their value never can be known with any tolerable 
accuracy. When, however, we find, that the precious metals and 
our stocks have continued for years to be leaving our country; 
when we know that the rate of exchange has been, during all that 
time, in favor of England, the conclusion is irresistible, that the 
actual balance of trade must be against us; but to what amount, 
I admit we cannot ascertain. 

It has been said, that as gold is the only legal tender in 
England, and silver is a mere article of merchandise, and that as 
the value of silver, compared with that of gold, is much greater 
in this country, than in England, it is only the apparent rate of 
exchange which is against us. This circumstance, I admit, proves 
that the rate of exchange is not so much against us as it appears 
to be. But, making every allowance for this difference, exchange 
is, and has been for years, from four to seven per cent, in favor 
of England. This shows conclusively, that funds in England 
are always wanted by our merchants in this country; and for 
what purpose? Is it not self-evident, that it must be to pay the 
difference between the value of our exports and our imports? 

It is perhaps unfortunate that this bill was reported by the 
Committee on Manufactures. Had one, containing the same 
principles, emanated from the Committee of Ways and Means, 
as a revenue measure, it would have encountered much less oppo- 
sition. I ask gentlemen, however, to look through the form 
into the substance, and not suffer themselves to be alarmed at the 
adoption of a wise and politic system, merely because it has been 
entitled " a bill for the more effectual encouragement and pro- 
tection of certain domestic manufactures," and not to raise rev- 
enue. The title of the bill can at any time be changed, and this 
w^ould at once destroy one-half of the arguments which have 
been urged against its passage. 

I have thus expressed my ideas respecting the general prin- 
ciples of the bill. It contains provisions, however, to which I am 



1823] THE NEW TARIFF BILL 67 

unfriendly, after having given them the most deliberate consider- 
ation. I am willing to encourage the manufacture of wool, by 
imposing an additional duty of five per cent, upon the importation 
of the foreign manufacture. The duty will then be thirty per 
cent, ad valorem. This in my opinion, is sufficient, at least for 
the present. The provision which declares, that the minimum 
valuation of each square yard, on which a duty is imposed, shall 
be eighty cents, would increase the duty to one hundred per cent, 
upon coarse woolens. This would at once amount to a prohibi- 
tion of articles of that description — a measure for which the 
country is not at this time prepared. Although we import a vast 
quantity of woolen goods from abroad, we have not the raw 
material to supply even the woolen manufactures which already 
exist at home. We are, therefore, under the necessity of import- 
ing wool itself. A\'hat would then be the inevitable consequence 
of this measure, in the present state of the country? It would 
for many years, until we could raise wool and establish manufac- 
tories sufficient to supply the whole country, double the price 
of an article essential to the comfort of the poor. It would be a 
tax levied upon that portion of society least able to sustain it, and 
given as a premium to the manufacture of wool. Let us proceed 
gradually. If, after the lapse of years, we shall discover that 
we have an abundance of the raw material at home, and the manu- 
facture of it is so well understood in the country, that the domestic 
competition will, in a short time reduce the price as low or lower 
than that of the foreign manufacture, then, and not till then, 
should we impose a prohibitory duty. It was thus we proceeded 
with respect to coarse cottons, and experience has justified the 
measure. At present, I am opposed to the imposition of a 
prohibitory duty on any foreign articles, necessary to the comfort 
of the great body of our people. 

I am decidedly in favor of the small additional duty of five 
dollars per ton, proposed by this bill on foreign iron. In the 
opinion of the Secretary of the Treasury, this would be strictly 
a revenue measure. I have made many inquiries on the subject, 
and the result has been a conviction upon my mind, that, under 
the new duty, as much of that article would be imported as there 
is at present, I confess, I was somewhat astonished to hear this 
proposition opposed with so much earnestness by the gentleman 
from Massachusetts. (Mr, Baylies,) and the gentleman from 
Rhode Island, (Mr, Durfee,) particularly the latter. He resides 
in a manufacturing district. The eastern people have, by the 



68 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1823 

indulgence and protection of the Government, acquired almost a 
monopoly of coarse cotton goods. The cottons and the sugars 
of the South have been amply protected. I am sorry, therefore, 
to find that gentlemen, from those portions of the Union, are 
unwilling to afiford a small share of that bounty to the Middle 
States, which has been so liberally extended to them. 

It has been stated by the gentleman from New York, (Mr. 
Cambreleng,) that the manufacturers of this article are now in 
a prosperous condition. In this he is certainly mistaken. To 
carry on the manufacture of iron, a great capital and a large 
body of land, producing timber, are both necessary. Those iron 
masters who had acquired sufficient wealth to survive the general 
wreck in which a large proportion of that class of citizens has been 
involved, are now prospering, if they live in a neighborhood at 
some distance from the seacoast, in which there is a demand for 
all the iron they can manufacture. In such a situation they can 
bring domestic into competition with foreign iron; because, in 
addition to the duty which it pays, the expense of transportation 
into the country is added to its price. What is the condition 
of those manufacturers of iron who have no market in their own 
neighborhood, and who, in addition to what the article costs them 
at home, have to pay the price of transporting it to market ? Go 
into the interior and mountainous districts of Pennsylvania, and 
you will there discover. That country abounds with ore, with 
wood, and with water power. Some years ago manufactories 
of iron started up in abundance. They diffused wealth all 
around them. They afforded the best and surest market to the 
neighboring country for the products of agriculture. It is now a 
melancholy spectacle to behold them. They have sunk under the 
false policy of the Government, and their ruin has essentially 
injured the whole agricultural community by which they were 
surrounded. 

Will the gentlemen from the East and South refuse to grant 
this small boon to the farmers and manufacturers of the Middle 
States ? Suppose that the price of iron should be raised to them 
$5 per ton, which is by no means certain, would they, for the 
sake of twenty-five cents per hundred, refuse to grant us this 
trifling advantage? I trust not, especially when they consider 
that iron is a necessary both in w^ar and in peace, and we ought 
not to be dependent for its supply on foreign nations. 

I am, also, decidedly in favor of an additional duty upon 
articles manufactured of flax: because it will operate as a direct 



1823] THE NEW TARIFF BILL 69 

encouragement to the growers of that article, and thus favor 
the agricultural interest. 

For the same reason, I am friendly to an additional duty on 
foreign hemp. The vast and fertile region watered by the 
^Mississippi and its tributary streams, is capable of producing an 
abundance of that article to supply the demand of the world. 
Why, then, should we go to Russia for our hemp ? Why should 
we not give to the growers of it some additional encouragement, 
which will enable them to enter into fair competition, in our 
own market, with the foreign article? If you will do so, in a 
vei7 little time hemp will be produced in such abundance, that 
the price, instead of being increased, will be diminished. It will 
soon be prepared for use as well as the Russian hemp. I have 
no wish to prohibit the importation of that article; all I desire 
is to see a fair competition established in our own market between 
that of foreign and of domestic growth. May not the agricul- 
turists of the West say, with justice, to the cotton growers of the 
South, and manufacturers of the East, who have both been pro- 
tected by the fostering care of the Government — we are your 
best customers; we consume immense quantities of your goods; 
why will you, then, go to Russia for your hemp, instead of pur- 
chasing it from us ? Why will you be dependent upon a foreign 
nation for an article absolutely necessary to the existence of your 
Navy, when your own country can afford it in abundance? 
Whether the additional duty proposed in the present bill be too 
high or not. I will not say, until I have received further infor- 
mation on the subject. 

But, Mr. Chairman, after we shall have done all this, a large 
and most important portion of your Union will have been com- 
paratively neglected. What have you done for those States 
whose staple commodity is grain? The island of Great Britain, 
which supplies you with immense quantities of her manufactures, 
will not receive in exchange a single bushel of our grain or a 
barrel of our flour. Their ports are entirely closed against our 
breadstuffs, because it is their policy to give their own agri- 
culturists exclusive possession of the home market. In adopting 
any measure for the collection of additional revenue, you should 
not forget the grain-growing States. It is my intention, there- 
fore, to propose, as an amendment to this bill, that an additional 
duty of ten cents per gallon be imposed upon foreign spirits. 
This would operate directly in favor of the farmer, by increasing 
the price of the grain out of which whiskey is made; and the 



70 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1823 

moral consequences which would flow from enhancing the price 
of that article, would be quite as favorable as those which are 
political. As I intend, when I shall offer the amendment, to 
present my views upon it somewhat in detail, I shall not now 
trouble the Committee further upon this subject. 

Upon the whole, then, I consider the present measure as one 
of great importance to the best interests of this country. It is a 
bill, as much, if not more for the encouragement of agriculture 
than of manufactures. I have the interests of agriculture at 
heart. If I could, for a single moment, believe, in the language 
of the gentleman from Georgia, (Mr. Tattnall,) that this bill would 
compel the agricultural to bow down before the manufacturing 
interest, which he has figuratively called the golden calf, I should 
consider myself a traitor to my country in giving it any support. 
Believing, however, as I do, that it is a measure fraught with 
good to all, and doing injury to none. I trust that the gentlemen 
who have shown so much hostility to it will withdraw their oppo- 
sition, and assist us in perfecting its details. It may then be made 
equally advantageous to the East, and to the West, and to the 
North, and to the South. 



REMARKS, FEBRUARY 10, 1823, 

AS TO THE PUNISHMENT OF CRIMES.^ 

Mr. Buchanan submitted the following: 

Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary be instructed to inquire 
whether there be any, and, if any, what, crimes not now punishable by law, 
to which punishments ought to be affixed. 

In offering this resolution, Mr. B. said, it had been decided 
that the courts of the United States had no power to punish any 
act, no matter how criminal in its nature, unless Congress have 
declared it to be a crime, and annexed a punishment to its per- 
petration.2 Offences at the common law, not declared such by 
acts of Congress, are therefore not within the range of the juris- 
diction of the Federal courts. Congress have annexed punish- 
ments but to a very few crimes, and those all of an aggravated 
nature. The consequence is, that a great variety of actions, to 
which a high degree of moral guilt is attached, and which are 



^ Annals of Congress, 17 Cong. 2 Sess. 1822-1823, 929. 

^ The case here referred to is United States v. Hudson, 7 Cranch, 32. 



1823] TO JOHN SERGEANT 71 

punished as crimes at the common law, and by every State in the 
Union, may be committed with impunity on the high seas, and 
in any place where Congress has exclusive jurisdiction. To 
afford an example : An assault and battery, with intent to commit 
murder, may be perpetrated, either on the high seas, or in a fort, 
magazine, arsenal, or dockyard, belonging to the United States, 
and there exists no law to punish such an offence. 

This is a palpable defect in our system, which requires a 
remedy ; and it is astonishing that none has ever yet been supplied. 
My attention has been called to the subject by a distinguished pro- 
fessional gentleman now in this city. Mr. B. said he did not 
expect that any bill could be matured and passed into a law at the 
present session. If, however, the Judiciary Committee would 
take the subject into consideration, and report upon it to the 
House before it rises, it would call public attention to it, and 
insure the passage of a bill at an early period of the next Congress. 

The resolution was then adopted. 



TO JOHN SERGEANT/ 

Lancaster 9th May 1823. 
Dear Sir/ 

I have often taken up my pen to write to you since I left 
Washington but as often laid it down not knowing precisely what 
I should write. After having collected all the information in my 
power, I will now at length venture with great diffidence to offer 
you my opinion as to the propriety of suffering yourself to be- 
come a candidate at the approaching election for governor. My 
advice may perhaps be the more agreeable because I have good 
reason to believe it will correspond with your own determination. 

In my opinion there are many reasons why you should not 
suffer your name to be used at the present time & perhaps 
they are such as no one but an individual who feels an interest 
in your personal welfare would communicate. The party which 
would nominate you could select no other man who would obtain 
so many votes. There is a strong probability that you might be 
elected : nay I believe the chance to be more than equal in your 
favour. But what then. The contest would be a dreadful one — 
every effort which malice & low cunning united could bring 

^ From the Buchanan Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania. 



72 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

to bear upon ignorance would be used to blacken your character. 
After your election the majority of the Legislature would be 
opposed to you & every endeavour which you might make to 
improve the condition of the State would be thwarted. You 
might not be elected & then the hopes of your political prefer- 
ment either in the general or State government which your friends 
have been cherishing would at once be blasted. 

I think you would risque too much by entering upon the 
approaching contest. There is no man in the State so universally 
known & I trust I may add without the imputation of flattery 
so universally respected as you are yourself among the better 
classes of people of both parties. There is now little political 
prejudice against you & the time will come & that ere long 
when unless something unforeseen should occur you may have 
any office which either the votes or the influence of the people 
can confer. The days of the Findlays, the Hiesters, the Greggs, 
and the Shulzes are fast passing away in Pennsylvania. 

I need scarcely add if your friends who are of a different 
opinion from me should prevail upon you to suffer your name 
to be used, you may rest assured that whatever little influence 
I possess shall all be exerted to promote your election. Should 
you not be a candidate I shall feel but little interest in the 
approaching contest & shall take no active part. 

I intend (Deo volente) to visit the North this summer. 
Have you any idea of making such an excursion. 

Please to present my best respects to Mrs. Sergeant & believe 

me to be Your sincere friend 

T, TT T o Tames Buchanan. 

The Hon. John Sergeant. •' 



1824. 
REMARKS, JANUARY 5, 1824, 

ON COSTS IN PATENT CASES.' 

Mr. Webster, from the Committee on the Judiciary, to whom 
was recommitted a bill concerning costs in certain cases, reported 
the same, with the amendment directed by the instructions of the 
House, viz : the substitution of one hundred dollars in place of 
thirty dollars, as the minimum of damages awarded by a jury, on 
which costs should be allowed. 



* Annals of Congress. i8 Cong, i Sess. 1823-1824, I. 932-937. 



1824] COSTS IN PATENT CASES 73 

The question being on ordering the bill to be engrossed for 
a third reading as amended — 

Mr. Webster said, that, on the introduction of this bill to 
the House, a few days ago, he had stated the reason for proposing 
this bill, to be, that though the law limited the recovery of costs, 
in the courts of the United States, in general cases, to suits involv- 
ing an amount not less than five hundred dollars, there was a 
propriety of a reduction of the minimum in the case of suits by 
patentees, because it was supposed to be matter of necessity for 
the patentee to sue in the Federal courts. An honorable member 
had, on a former occasion, suggested that the State courts have 
jurisdiction in cases of this description; but, Mr. W. said, if the 
honorable member would refer to the law, he would see that the 
act of Congress which creates the right prescribes the remedy, 
and provides that the patentee may sue for it in the circuit courts 
of the United States, and under that phraseology it was presumed 
that he could not sue elsewhere than in those courts. 

Mr. Buchanan had objections to the whole bill. What, asked 
he, is the law in the case of patentees as it now stands ? A most 
extraordinary distinction over other clients is made in their favor, 
by granting them judgment for three times the amount of 
damages awarded by a jury. And what does the bill, now before 
the House, propose to do in favor of those favored individuals? 
To superadd costs to that treble verdict. He would ask whether 
such a measure is right; whether it is politic; whether it is just? 
He thought it would be neither. He thought it far better to let 
the law remain as it now stands. What had been the history 
of this country on the subject of patent rights? It was known 
to all, that the privilege granted by the patent law, had been exten- 
sively diffused through the Union. The number of patents 
actually issued was very great; the number pretended to be 
enjoyed was greater still. Impositions were multiplied. In 
some districts of the Union very large amounts of money had 
been collected from such as were afraid of the expense of a law 
suit, by persons claiming to have a patent for the use or manu- 
facture of certain articles; and, after they had gone through a 
whole region, thus practicing on the fears or ignorance of the 
inhabitants, it turned out, when at last some one had hardihood 
enough to contest their claim, that they had no right at all. This 
was especially the case in those States which were of extensive 
size, and the distance from the circuit court occasioned formidable 
expense in resorting to trial. The claimant brings a patent in his 



74 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

hand, and thus has priiiia facie evidence of the vaHdity of his 
right; he asks, perhaps, but eight or ten dollars for the article; 
who would not rather pay that sum than run the risk of travelling 
one or two hundred miles, to the circuit court, taking witnesses 
with him, at the risk, if he fails, of having treble damages to pay, 
and, if this bill passes, costs to boot? He could scarce conceive 
of a measure better calculated to enable designing men to roam 
at large and prey upon the community. He thought, for his part, 
that the law was already hard enough. It gave already enormous 
advantages to the patentee over his opponent; and, if costs were 
to be superadded, it destroyed all prospect of successful contest. 
Costs, it must be remembered, are, in their nature, very indeter- 
minate; their amount might increase to such a sum as would 
ruin a man. To be sure, the amendment now reported makes the 
bill better, so far as it goes; but, even under the bill, as amended, 
if a patentee does but obtain a verdict for thirty- four dollars, he 
gets his costs also allowed him, because treble the verdict runs 
over one hundred dollars, and brings him within the provisions 
of the bill. Is it not proper, asked Mr. B., that the pretended 
patentee shall first be made to establish his right before his oppon- 
ent is threatened with treble damages and costs? He thought 
the law^ should at least be left unaltered; for himself, he felt 
more disposed to curtail than to extend it. 

Mr. Livermore said, that, at first, he had viewed the object 
and provisions of the present bill as proper and expedient ; but, 
on further reflection, he had seen reason to alter that opinion. 
He thought, however, that the fault of the system did not lie 
so much in that feature of it which allowed costs where damages 
over one hundred dollars were obtained, but in that which pre- 
viously allowed the verdict of the jury to be treble. Why should 
not suitors under the patent law be placed on the same footing 
with other suitors? The alteration he wished to prevail was to 
repeal the treble damages and allow costs in all cases. But, if 
it should be deemed proper to alter that provision, then he thought 
that costs should be given, rather where the amount was under 
one hundred dollars tlian over that sum. If a verdict w^as 
obtained for ten dollars and treble, the additional twenty dollars 
was not likely to be enough to cover the costs. He wislied to 
see the whole system placed under the Committee on the Judiciary 
to be remodelled ; he would also give the State courts concurrent 
jurisdiction with those of the United States, in cases under the 
patent law. 



1824] COSTS IN PATENT CASES 75 

Mr. Webster, in reply to Mr. Buchanan, said, that he felt 
no particular anxiety on the subject of this bill; but, having 
charge of the bill, it seemed proper of him to say something in 
its defence. The House would recollect, he said, that this whole 
case of patents is taken, by the law, out of the hands of the State 
courts, the jurisdiction over it being exclusively reserved to the 
courts of the United States. The power of legislating on this 
subject is taken from the States by the Constitution of the United 
States. And, at this time of day, and before this Assembly, Mr. 
W. said he need not argue that the right of the inventor is a high 
property ; it is the fruit of his mind — it belongs to him more than 
any other property — he does not inherit it — he takes it by no 
man's gift — it peculiarly belongs to him, and he ought to be pro- 
tected in the enjoyment of it. Precisely as the arts advance, Mr. 
W. went on to say, does property of this description become 
valuable; where the nicest machinery is in operation, it is there 
that the improvements of inventors are in the highest estimation — 
and with regard to those branches of industry which have been 
most successful in this country, they are more indebted to the 
ingenuity of inventors — to the power of mind in the improvement 
of machinery, than to another species of aid which they have 
received from time to time. It is to encourage these inventions 
that our patent laws are designed. Is it any answer to this 
argument in their favor, that impositions are sometimes practiced 
under cover of these laws? Is it not so with everything else? 
With regard to land, for example — are there not many persons 
pretending to have titles to land who really have no title? Are 
there not as many speculations in landed property as in the prop- 
erty of mind? And shall a man not recover his right to land 
because the world is full of pretensions of right to land where 
no right exists ? Surely not. It was said by an honorable mem- 
ber from the West the other day, that the people in his part of 
the country did not know that there was such a thing as a patent 
office in the country, or such a clause in the Constitution as 
that which relates to patent rights. Mr. W. said, he did not 
know that on this account the House should accommodate its 
legislation precisely to that state of information. The error 
was not in the Constitution or the patent laws, but in the want 
of knowledge among the people, and could only be corrected 
by its diffusion. In restricting the patentee to the recovery 
of mere judicial damages, Mr. W. continued, justice was not 
done to him. He cannot sue for all his right at once, because 
the violations by which he is deprived of it are numerous. Sup- 



76 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHAXAN [18:^4 

pose you were to compel a man, in suing for land, to sue for it 
acre bv acre — he might get his land, indeed, but he would be 
ruined by the process of recovery. It was because the particular 
injury in the case of the violation of a patent right was small, and 
the expense of redressing it great, that the provision of this bill 
appeared to be expedient. A redress of the actual injury was 
not sufficient in this class of cases — if the penalty for the violation 
was not sufficient to act in terrorem, it was nothing. Do not 
all penal statutes, Mr. W. asked, go on the ground, that damages 
are not only to be given to indemnify a sufferer in a particular 
case, but to such an amount as to deter others from doing the 
like? The argument of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, be- 
sides, went too far. If the damages are awarded at five hundred 
dollars, as the law now stands, costs are allowed ; whilst, if the 
damages be but ten dollars, they are not allowed. What justice 
was tiiere in this? Where an action is brought to recover 
damages for the use of an invention or improvement in machinery, 
the common rule is, to settle the amount of damages at the sale 
price of the article; and one of the injurious consequences to 
defendants themselves, from the present state of the law, is, that 
the juries give as much damages as will carry the costs. He 
could assure the gentleman from Pennsylvania, whatever might 
be said in other parts of the country, there was no right which an 
independent jurs' of the part of the country in which he resided 
would protect with more certainty or vigilance, than the patent 
right. In a clear case, where the intention to deprive the inven- 
tor of the benefit of his patent was obvious, the jury would, in 
almost any case, give damages to the full amount of five hundred 
dollars. This bill, therefore, would, in this respect, be beneficial 
to the defendants themselves. On the part of patentees, there 
were so many things to be proved — for instance, that the invention 
is new, that it is useful, that the specification is accurate, &c. — 
so much nicety was required, as to thrown sufficient obstacles in his 
way. The right of the patentee. Mr. W. said, was one which the 
Constitution of the United States had authorized and enjoined 
upon Congress to protect: the party injured has no security or 
resort elsewhere, but to the courts of the United States ; and if 
it was reasonable that in such case he should be entitled to 
recover costs where the damages amount to one hundred dollars, 
then this bill ought to pass; if not, it ought not to pass. 

Mr. T'.nchanan, in reply, observed, that no one could be more 
disposed to protect the just rights of patentees than he was; nor 



1824] COSTS IN PATENT CASES 77 

could any person concur more heartily than he did in the senti- 
ments of the honorable gentleman from Massachusetts respecting 
the property which an inventor has in that which is the product 
of his own genius ; yet, he held it to be a principle in legislation, 
while guarding the rights of one individual, not to forget or to 
impair those of the rest of the community. A wise legislator was 
bound to give equal protection to the rights of all. Ever since the 
passage of the patent law under the Constitution, the courts had 
been open to patentees, and the burden of proof had always been 
cast on the violator of his patent. He must prove that his 
act was no violation of the patent, or that the patent was in itself 
invalid. This operated, at least in that part of the Union which 
he had the honor to represent, as a great hardship ; yet it had been 
cheerfully submitted to, and the mere production of the patent 
was allowed to be presumptive evidence in favor of the patentee. 
But the law went farther ; it not only threw the burden of proof 
on the alleged violator, but it tripled all damages against him. 
And now it was proposed to go farther still, and to allow all 
costs in the bargain, wherever these damages should, when tripled, 
amount to $ioo. Had he rightly heard and understood the gen- 
tleman from Massachusetts ? Did he say that, in that part of the 
Union, a jury would always give a verdict of $500? H such 
were the fact, he did not wonder that the voice of the community 
was never heard against the provisions of the law. Who would 
not rather pay $10 than run the risk of a verdict of $500, to be 
tripled, with costs? No wonder there was a deep silence. The 
act, as amended by this bill, placed the community at the mercy 
of patentees. To oblige a man to go two or three hundred miles 
to court, then oblige him to prove the patent false, and, if he 
fails, to make him pay triple damages, and costs of suit, is to 
place an array of obstacles in the way that must, in most cases, 
effectually prevent the validity of patents from being ever con- 
tested. Such ought not to be the practical operation of law on 
this subject. If the law is left as it now stands, will the patentee 
suffer any injury? None at all. Suppose his patent is a good 
and valid one, and suppose he has to sue in order to establish 
that fact, will not such a suit be, in effect, a benefit? Can he 
not thenceforth exhibit with his patent the verdict that has con- 
firmed it? But, if this bill becomes a law, it will go forth through- 
out the country to let loose unprincipled pretenders to prowl upon 
the community. He was verv^ sorry it had been his lot to differ 
in opinion from the honorable member from Massachusetts, for 



78 THE AVORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

whose opinions no man cherished a more profound respect; but 
he had been rekictantly urged by a sense of duty to oppose a bill 
which he conceived to be fraught with injury. 
Mr. Clarke, of New York, then moved 

That the bill, with the amendment, be recommitted to the Committee 
on the Judiciary, with instructions to inquire into the expediency of repealing 
so much of the law upon the subject of the violation of patents, as provides 
for the recovery of triple damages in suits brought by patentees for such 
violation, and that where judgment shall pass for defendant, or the plaintiff 
become non-suit, or suffer discontinuance, the defendant shall recover double 
costs. 

The motion was agreed to, and the bill recommitted accord- 
ingly- 



REMARKS, JANUARY 15, 1824, 

ON THE ERECTION OF A MONUMENT TO WASHINGTON IN 

THE CAPITOL. 1 

Mr. Buchanan presented the following resolution: 

Resolved, That a committee be appointed, whose duty it shall be to 
inquire in what manner the resolutions of Congress, passed on the 24th 
December, 1799, relative to the erection of a marble monument in the Capitol, 
at the City of Washington, to commemorate the great events of the military 
and political life of General Washington, may be best accomplished, and that 
they have leave to report by bill or otherwise. 

Mr. Buchanan said, the House would, he trusted, excuse him 
for making a few observations in explanation of the motives which 
had impelled him to offer the resolution now under consideration. 
On the 24th December, 1799, the Congress of the United States 
resolved, " That a marble monument be erected by the United 
States, in the Capitol, at the City of Washington, and that the 
family of General Washington be requested to permit his body 
to be deposited under it ; and that the monument be so designed 
as to commemorate the great events of his military and political 
life." They also resolved, " That the President of the United 
States be requested to direct a copy of these resolutions to be 
transmitted to Mrs. Washington, assuring her of the profound 
respect Congress will ever bear to her person and character; of 
their condolence on the late afflicting dispensations of Providence: 
and entreating her assent to the interment of the remains of Gen- 



' Annals of Congress, 18 Cong, i Sess. 1823-1824, 1044-1048. 



1824] MONUMENT TO WASHINGTON 79 

eral George Washington in the manner expressed in the first 
resolution." The then President of the United States transmitted 
these resolutions to Mrs. Washington, who, on the 31st Decem- 
ber, 1799, returned an answer, which I will take leave to read to 

the House : 

Mount Vernon, Dec. 31, 1799. 

Sir: While I feel with keenest anguish, the late dispensation of Divine 
Providence, I cannot be insensible to the mournful tributes of respect and 
veneration which are paid to the memory of my dear deceased husband; 
and, as his best services and most anxious wishes were always devoted to 
the welfare and happiness of his country, to know that they were truly 
appreciated, and gratefully remembered, affords no inconsiderable consolation. 

Taught by that great example which I have so long had before me, 
never to oppose my private wishes to the public will, I must consent to 
the request made by Congress, which you have had the goodness to transmit 
to me; and in doing this I need not, I cannot say what a sacrifice of 
individual feeling I make to a sense of public duty. 

With grateful acknowledgments, and unfeigned thanks, for the personal 
respect, and evidences of condolence, expressed by Congress, and yourself. 

I remain, very respectfully, 

Sir, your most obed't humble servant, 

Martha Washington. 

During the same session of Congress, a bill passed the House 
of Representatives for erecting a mausoleum for George Wash- 
ington in the City of Washington. It was postponed in the 
Senate until the next session. Several attempts have since been 
made in Congress to redeem the plighted faith of the nation, but 
they have all proved unavailing. The man who was emphatically 
first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his country- 
men, has been sleeping with his fathers for almost a quarter of a 
century, and his mortal remains have yet been unhonored by that 
people, who, with justice, call him the father of their country. 

It is difficult to determine, whether this neglect be more 
impolitic or ungrateful. Every wise nation has paid honors to 
the memory of the men who have been the saviours of their coun- 
try. Sculpture and painting have vied with each other, in trans- 
mitting their images and the memory of their deeds to the remotest 
generations. By these means, the holy fire of virtuous emulation 
has been kindled in the bosoms of the youth of succeeding ages. 

Our country has produced a General, whose prudence and 
perseverance, whose courage and military skill, conquered our 
independence, against fearful odds, from the most powerful 
nation on earth; and what is still more wonderful, was never 
intoxicated by the illusions of military glory. Our country has 



80 



THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 



given birth to a statesman, who was chiefly instrumental in con- 
verting the chaos of the old Confederation, into the most perfect 
fabric^'of human wisdom— the Federal Constitution ; and whose 
conduct, as President of the United States, was characterized 
by such'wisdom and virtue, that, after the strictest examination, 
it' is now admitted to be the most proper guide, to direct us m 
the path which leads to the nation's prosperity and glory. In 
short, our country has produced a Washington ; he has been dead 
for four and twenty years, and we have erected no monument on 
which to record his virtues, and our gratitude. 

Air. B. said, that Congress, by neglecting, for so long a 
period, to accomplish the object of the resolutions, had been sub- 
jected to the imputation of perfidy, as well as ingratitude. We 
made a solemn promise to the widowed partner of Washington, 
and to the people of the United States, by a legislative act, that 
we would erect a monument to his memory. That distinguished 
lady has long slumbered with him in the grave, and this pledge 
lias never yet been redeemed. Although his mortal remains, 
have, at our request, and by her consent, become the property of 
the public, yet they still lie neglected. Indeed, I have been credi- 
bly informed, that an attempt has been made to steal them away 
from his country, which had almost proved successful. 

Do we, Mr. Speaker, consider it a matter of necessity, in 
all respects, to preser\^e the public faith inviolate? And shall 
we prove faithless only in what concerns the memory of Wash- 
ington? The danger of the precedent, the argument so often 
repeated in this House, against the adoption of measures, will, in 
this case, be unavailing. The long list of ages, which preceded 
the birth of Washington, had never presented a human character 
so perfect ; and there is but a bare possibility that future gener- 
ations will produce his equal. 

Mr. B. hoped the resolution would pass unanimously. 
(Here Mr. Cary, of Georgia, made some remarks, in which 
he argued that the practice of erecting monuments to illustrious 
men originated in times before the light of reason had penetrated 
the darkness of society; that it represented a spirit of vanity, 
unsuited to America; and that the monument to Washington 
should be in the bosoms of the people.) 

Mr. Buchanan observed, in reply, that when he brought for- 
ward the resolution he had the honor to present to the House, 
he did not suppose that any gentleman would feel it to be his 
duty to oppose its adoption. He differed wholly from the honor- 



1824] DUTY ON COTTON BAGGING 81 

able gentleman from Georgia. That gentleman maintained that 
it was not proper for a Republic, by monumental marble, to excite 
its citizens to virtuous deeds by publicly honoring the memory of 
those who had been the benefactors of their country. He, on the 
contrary, thought that in the case of Republics there was in the 
practice a peculiar and special propriety. Such monuments had, 
in all ages and countries, exerted a powerful effect in inciting men 
to patriotic virtue; our Government rests, its very foundations 
are laid, on that virtue; and it therefore seemed in a peculiar 
manner adapted to the circumstances of this Republic. It was, 
too, a practice which had been already sanctioned by the example 
of some of the most respectable States in the Union. But it was 
now too late to talk about the policy of the measure. Is not, asked 
Mr. B., the faith of the nation pledged? Has not the measure 
been publicly resolved upon by both Houses of Congress? Has 
it not received the sanction of the President of the United States ? 
Is the country to promise to-day. and violate its promise to- 
morrow? The faith of the Government, pledged twenty-five 
years since, to the family of the deceased, and to the American 
people, has never, to this day, been redeemed. Shall we hold 
all our contracts inviolable but this? As to the precedent, that 
question has already been settled ; the pledge has been given. 
And were gentlemen alarmed at the danger of such a precedent? 
They might calm their apprehensions ; there was not the remotest 
danger of such another case recurring. The world, in its long 
course of days, had never beheld such a man before; and, in all 
the march of time, there was little probability of the world's ever 
seeing such another; and for himself. Mr. B. said, he felt so 
deeply the obligation to redeem the pledged promise of the nation, 
that, though little accustomed to make such requests, he must 
ask that the yeas and nays might be recorded. 

The resolution was ordered to lie on the table, by a vote of 
97 to dy. 



REMARKS, FEBRUARY 16, 17, 19, AND 26, 1824, 

ON A PROPOSED DUTY OF SIX CENTS A YARD ON IMPORTED 

COTTON BAGGING.i 

[Feb. 1 6.] Mr. Buchanan said that much embarrassment 
had arisen from uncertainty in the amount per cent, to which 

^ Annals of Congress, i8 Cong, i Sess. 1823-1824, I. 1546, 1547, 1565, 1566, 
1590, 1678. 

6 



82 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

the bill contemplated to raise the present duty on bagging. Some 
gentlemen stated it to be 25 per cent., others 30, others 80, others, 
again, over 100. He said he was favorable to the cause of m.anu- 
factures, and thought it ought to be protected ; but not by going 
faster than the growth of manufactures would warrant. He 
thought, as the farmers of the West had no market for their grain, 
that their hemp ought to be brought into fair competition with 
that of foreigners; this was as far as he would go. He was 
willing, on the article now under consideration, to vote for a duty 
of 10 instead of 20 per cent, additional. He was informed that 
4>^ cents per square yard would be equal to a total duty of 30 
per cent., and this he should move, if the present duty was not 
carried. 

Mr. Buchanan replied to Mr. Tod, and said he was sorry the 
gentleman was willing to risk, as he said, the whole bill on such 
a desperate hazard as the passing of this duty — a duty, he was 
prepared to show, greater than that on any other article in the 
whole bill. He approved the duty on hemp, and was willing to 
make that on bagging equal to it. He thought the proposed duty 
out of proportion, and much greater than needful. He censured 
the implied threats of resistance thrown out by a gentleman from 
Georgia. Such language tended to disunion, and ought to be 
repressed.^ Yet he believed that Congress might go so far (in 
proposing, for instance, a direct land tax for the support of 
manufactures) that the people would rise in their majesty, and 
overwhelm the act, factories, and all. By going too far, gentle- 
men only incurred the danger of reaction. 

*(* 3p 3|C ?{C TjS i;C «|C ^ ^ 'jC 

[Feb. 17.] Mr. Buchanan disclaimed the principles ad- 
vanced by the gentleman from Virginia,^ (Mr. Mercer,) he was 
in favor of the general system proposed by the bill — it was the 
settled policy of this country — we had advanced from one tariff 
to another on that principle, and we now had a third, but we 



* Mr. Cobb, of Georgia, in opposing the proposed dut}% " ended, by inti- 
mating, that, althongh the people of the South were orderly and submissive 
to the authority of their Government, there might be a point, to which, if 
prohibitions should be pushed, they would be resisted." (Annals of Congress, 
18 Cong. I Sess. I. 1544.) 

" That the bill was opposed at least to the spirit of the Constitution. 



1824] DUTY ON COTTON BAGGING 83 

should advance with cautious steps, and not injure the kindred 
interests of agricuhure and commerce. He entirely agreed with 
the honorable Speaker in the sentiments avowed in the close of 
his speech; there must be a system of mutual concession — we 
must agree to give and take. He was equally opposed to both 
extremes proposed ; one party said, strike out the duty altogether ; 
to this he could not consent — he would indeed rejoice to see trade 
perfectly unshackled; but, while other countries surrounded it 
with protecting restrictions, we must do so too in self-defence. 
Another party were for raising the duty from twenty to forty 
per cent. ; he thought this too much ; we must have some regard 
to revenue. He was for pursuing a middle course, which, though 
it might not at once drive the Dundee manufacturer out of the 
market, would give life and vigor to our own factories, and enable 
them to compete with him. 

Mr. B. j;hen moved to strike out 6, and insert 2^ cents per 
square yard. This he hoped would meet the wishes of both 
parties : as to the general discussion of the principles of the bill, 
he hoped it would not be gone into ; he had derived more instruc- 
tion from hearing the details of the bill discussed thus far, than 
he should have done from listening for a month to long sermons 
on political economy. 

Mr. Cambreleng observed, in reply, that he had no inclina- 
tion to deliver what the honorable gentleman was pleased to call 
a sermon on political economy; but he must say, that he had 
listened to many a long speech in the present discussion, which 
was not on the bill at all; for, if he understood the bill, and 
the honorable Speaker and the Chairman of the Committee 
understood it, the gentleman last up certainly did not under- 
stand it. 

Mr. Brent expressed the idea that the whole bill, if intended 
not for protection, but for revenue, was out of order; for then 
it could not properly be reported by the Committee on Manufac- 
tures, but ought to have come from the Committee of Ways and 
Means. If the question on his motion to strike out could not 
be put, a question on the passage of the bill itself must be equally 
out of order. 

Mr. Buchanan then rose and said, that, in compliance with 
the request of his friends, rather than the dictates of his own 
judgment, he consented to withdraw his amendment. 



84 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

[Feb. 19.] Mr. Buchanan thought this a most extraordi- 
nary resolution.^ After the bill had been almost a month under 
discussion, when the measure had been examined by every news- 
paper in the country for years past, and the whole nation had 
taken sides on the question, that Congress should formally ask 
for infomiation as to what would be the operation of the bill ! He 
thought gentlemen were competent to obtain this information 
for themselves, or why were they sent here? The gentleman 
from Louisiana had now come fairly out, and avowed his willing- 
ness for delay ; but it was delay that ruined the bill last session, 
and delay would destroy it now. The Chairman of the Committee 
of Ways and Means had expressed his opinion — the members of 
that Committee were all in the House: Why send them out to 
make a long report, and then occupy as much time afterwards as 
before it? It was unreasonable to find fault with the Chairman 
of the Committee of Manufactures, for not laying a general state- 
ment before the House ; he had not been called on to do so — the 
debate having thus far been almost confined to cotton bagging. 
When necessary, he doubted not that gentleman was fully pre- 
pared to show what would be the operation of the whole bill, and 
of all its parts. 

:•: * :;: 5k * * ^' =!= * * 

[Feb. 26.] Mr. Buchanan then renewed his motion to 
change the duty [on cotton bagging] from six cents to four-and- 
a-half cents per square yard, which was agreed to — ayes 119. 



REMARKS, FEBRUARY 27, 1824, 

ON A PROPOSED DUTY OF TWENTY-FIVE CENTS PER BUSHEL 

ON WHEAT.2 

Mr. Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, spoke in favor of the duty. 
Let the Canadian grain growers go down their own river. While 
our own farmers are struggling for a market, shall we bring 
strangers into that market on a cheaper footing than they could 
otherwise get there, by the use of our facilities ? Europe is now 
in profound peace; she can grow wheat enough for her own 



' A resolution to direct the Committee of Ways and Means to examine 
and report what would be the effect of the bill on the revenues. (Annals 
of Congress, 18 Cong, i Sess. I. 1586.) 

^ Annals of Congress, 18 Cong, i Sess. 1823-1824, I. 1696. 



1824] DUTY ON BAR IRON 85 

consumption, and that of her dependencies; she may soon go 
farther, and seek to get the supplying of us. Let us anticipate 
such an idea, and meet them with a duty at our threshold. 



REMARKS, FEBRUARY 28, 1824, 

ON THE PROPOSED DUTY ON BAR IRON.i 

Mr. Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, followed Mr. Fuller. He 
said, that the duty upon bar iron, according to the existing tariff, 
was fifteen dollars per ton. This bill proposes to increase it to 
$22.50 — and the question for the Committee to decide, was the 
policy of this measure. 

It has been contended, said Mr. B., by the gentleman from 
Massachusetts, (Mr. Fuller,) that bar iron might be considered as 
almost a raw material. If that gentleman intended to convey the 
idea, that the manufacture of this article requires but little capital, 
he is entirely mistaken. The man who expects to prosecute it 
with success, ought not only to possess a considerable active capi- 
tal, but a large body of land covered with timber. Before the 
ore is manufactured into bar iron, it undergoes two distinct pro- 
cesses, at different factories. At the furnace it is converted into 
pig metal, which, in the forge, is manufactured into bar iron. 
These factories are generally distinct, and each of them requires 
a large capital. If, therefore, you suffer the manufactories of 
iron to be destroyed, and the capital invested in them to be 
diverted into other channels, it will be difficult to restore them, 
when the necessities of the country may demand such a measure. 

The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Fuller) has alleged 
that the manufacturers of iron, in Pennsylvania, are now in a 
prosperous condition. It is true, said Mr. B., that a few of the 
ironmasters, who had acquired sufficient wealth to survive the 
general wreck in which a large proportion of that class of our 
citizens has been involved, have been able to support themselves. 
This, however, has been the case only with respect to those who 
reside at some distance from the seacoast, and in a neighborhood 
in which there is a demand for all the iron they can manufacture. 
Foreign iron, before it can come into competition with theirs, 
must, in addition to the present duty, pay the expense of transpor- 
tation into the countr}^ Such individuals, by the ruin of rival 

^Annals of Congress, 18 Cong, x Sess. 1824, II. 1709-1712. 



8G THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 



111 



amifacturers, and by the consequent destruction of domestic 
competition within their sphere, have become the monopolists 
of their neighboring markets. In this manner, the farmer is com- 
pelled to pay a niucli greater price for his iron, than he would be 
obliged to give, if the protecting power of the Government would 
recall into existence those rival manufactories, which have sunk 
under its neglect. What, Mr. Chairman, is the condition of those 
manufacturers residing in the interior, who have no market at 
home, but must depend upon that of the Atlantic cities? As it 
regards them, the picture is reversed. In addition to the first 
cost of their iron, they are compelled to incur the expense of trans- 
porting it to a market where it comes into competition with that 
from Russia and Sweden. Such ironmasters, under the present 
tariff, must inevitably be ruined, if they should continue in the 
business. They w'ould lose upon every ton of iron which they 
manufacture. The consequence has been, that most of them, in 
this situation, have been compelled to stop. 

Sir, said Mr. B., the traveller, if he had gone into the interior 
and mountainous districts of Pennsylvania, but a few years ago, 
would have found a great number of furnaces and forges in active 
operation. Their owners were not only prosperous themselves, 
but they spread prosperity around them. These manufactories 
presented the best and surest market to the neighboring country, 
for the products of agriculture. Thus, they diffused wealth 
among the people, money circulated freely, and the manufacturer 
and the farmer were equally benefited. 

The present aspect of those districts presents a melancholy 
contrast to that which I have just described. It is a just com- 
ment upon the policy of that country which will not afford a 
reasonable protection to its own domestic industry, and thereby 
gives to foreigners a decided preference in its markets. Although 
that portion of Pennsylvania abounds with ore. with wood, and 
with water power, yet its manufactories generally have sunk into 
ruin, and exist only as standing monuments of the false policy 
of the Government. The manufacturers and their laborers have 
both been thrown out of employment, and the neighboring farmer 
is without a market. 

Sir, said Mr. B., the records of your Government prove, con- 
clusively, that foreign iron is rapidly driving domestic competition 
out of the market. In the year 1819, 16,241 tons of foreign 
hammered iron were imported. In the year 1822, it had increased 
to 26,508 tons. What it was during the last year. I have not been 



1824] DUTY ON BAR IRON 87 

able to ascertain with precision, but I am informed, that it has 
been regularly progressing in the same proportion. Thus, we 
perceive, that, in the short space of three years, the increase has 
been more than ten thousand tons. 

Can any statesman, said Mr. B., regard this process with 
indifference ? Is it the policy of this nation to suffer the manufac- 
ture of iron to be destroyed ? Can any gentleman for a moment 
sanction such an opinion? No nation can be perfectly indepen- 
dent, which depends upon foreign countries for its supply of iron. 
It is an article equally necessary in peace and in war. Without 
a plentiful supply of it, we cannot provide for the common de- 
fence. Can we so soon have forgotten the lesson which experi- 
ence taught us, during the late war with Great Britain? Our 
foreign supply was then cut off, and we could not manufacture 
in sufficient quantities for the increased domestic demand. The 
price of the article became extravagant, and both the Government 
and the agriculturist were compelled to pay double the sum for 
which they might have purchased it, had its manufacture, before 
that period, been encouraged by proper protecting duties. We 
cannot now always expect to remain at peace ; and the only means 
of securing to ourselves, in time of war, an abundant supply of 
this necessary article, at a cheap rate, is to encourage its manu- 
facture, whilst we are on terms of friendship with all nations. 

But after all, Mr. Chairman, what do we ask by this bill 
for the manufacturers of iron ? Not a prohibitory duty, as the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Fuller) seems to suppose, 
which will exclude foreign iron from our market. We wish only 
to infuse into our own manufactures sufficient vigor to enable 
them to struggle against foreign competition. Protection, not 
prohibition, is our object. The revenue which the country at 
present derives from foreign iron will, for several years at least, 
be increased by the proposed additional duty; and at the same 
time a most important branch of our domestic industry will be 
gradually cherished. For the proof of this assertion, I refer 
to the opinion advanced by the Secretary of the Treasury, in his 
annual report, during the last session, on the state of the finances. 
In it he distinctly declares " that the duties upon glass and paper, 
upon iron and lead, and upon all articles composed of the two 
latter materials, may be increased," " with a view to the augmen- 
tation of the revenue." His report during the present session 
shows that he still entertains the same opinion. 

Mr. B. said, revenue was at this time an important consid- 



88 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

eration. In the imposition of new duties, we should not lose 
sight of the Treasury. Notwithstanding the siren notes which 
we have heard on this floor concerning the prosperous condition 
of our revenue, we know that we are in debt about ninety millions 
of dollars ; a great part of which will become payable before our 
ordinary resources will enable us to extinguish it. Mr. B. said 
it was his opinion that, should this bill pass, with a very few 
amendments, it would for some years considerably increase the 
revenue of the country, and assist in enabling us to discharge 
our national debt. The proper occasion, however, has not yet 
arrived for such a general investigation. 

As it regards the article of iron, we may fairly infer, from 
the history of its importation, that the proposed addition 
to the duty will increase the revenue. In determining 
this question, we should inquire whether the foreign im- 
portation is increasing under the existing tariff; and if 
so, whether slowly or rapidly. According to this advance, 
we may proportion the additional duty, always keeping within 
reasonable limits. We find that in three years the increase has 
been more than ten thousand tons. Under the operation of this 
bill, the revenue will be augmented until the quantity imported 
shall be less by one-third than it is at present. No person 
acquainted with the condition of the iron manufactories of the 
country can suppose that they will be able to produce this effect 
for many years to come under an additional duty of only $7.50 
per ton. It will, however, afford them that gradual protection 
which is in accordance with the settled policy of this nation : a 
policy which, whilst it encourages domestic manufactures, never 
loses sight of the great interests of agriculture and commerce. 

Mr. B. said there was no article from the importation of 
which a duty might be more fairly derived than iron. It would 
not in any degree be partial in its operation. Its use was uni- 
versal, and all parts of the Union would, therefore, contribute 
their fair proportion. Mr. B. concluded by observing that there 
was no item in the bill which had fairer claims to be retained 
than the article of iron. 



1824] DUTIES ON WOOLLENS AND HEMP 89 

REMARKS, MARCH 4, 1824, 

ON THE DUTY ON WOOLLEN GOODS.i 

Mr. Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, supported the amendment, 
as a measure proper in itself, and calculated to promote a spirit 
of mutual conciliation. The present duty on woollen goods is 
twenty-five per cent, ad valorem — the bill would raise it to thirty- 
three and a third. The minimum proposed by the amendment is 
forty cents per square yard; a yard of coarse baize costs eight 
pence sterling; the ad valorem duty, as amended, is equal to 
eighty per cent. ; without the amendment, it will amount to 
one hundred and thirty per cent. He thought we were not yet 
ready for a prohibitory duty on coarse woollens ; to which article 
the arguments from coarse cottons did not apply, because cotton 
was abundant — wool was not. The amount imported last year 
was one million six hundred thousand pounds — worth three hun- 
dred and forty thousand dollars. By going too rapidly, in press- 
ing the system, we shall injure both the consumer and the manu- 
facturer. If the raw material was abundant, he should oppose 
any reduction of the minimum; but at present he should advocate 
the amendment. 



REMARKS, MARCH 23, 1824, 

ON A MOTION TO REDUCE THE PROPOSED DUTY ON HEMP FROM TWO 
CENTS A POUND TO ONE AND ONE-HALF CENTS.2 

The debate was then resumed by Mr. Buchanan, who advo- 
cated the duty proposed in the bill, and opposed the amendment, 
as did also Mr. Tod and Mr. Speaker Clay. It was supported by 
Messrs. Webster, Mercer, P. P. Barbour, Foot of Connecticut, 
Cambreleng, and McKim. The debate was continued in a series 
of speeches, abounding with fact and argument, and occasionally 
enlivened with attack and retort, in which humor was chastened 
by decorum. 

The following are Mr. Buchanan's remarks in reply to Mr. 
Reed: 

Mr. Buchanan said that, in rising to reply to the gentleman 
from Massachusetts, (Mr. Reed,) he did not intend to follow him 



^ Annals of Congress, i8 Cong, i Sess. 1824, II. 1742. 
^Annals of Congress, 18 Cong, i Sess. 1824, II. 1888-1893. 



90 THE \YORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

through the excursive range which he had taken. Judging from 
the speech alone, a stranger to the question might be induced 
to beheve that the measure under discussion was one, the adoption 
of which would, in its consequences, destroy the commerce and 
navigation of the country, and endanger the existence of its navy. 
Mr. B. said that, able and ingenious as had been the speech of the 
gentleman, he must be permitted to say that a large proportion 
of it had but a very remote application to the subject. 

What, said Mr. B., is the real question now under discussion? 
By the existing tariff of 1816, the duty upon the importation 
of foreign hemp is 150 cents upon each 112 lbs. The present 
bill proposes to increase that duty, which is now equal to 134 cents 
on the 100 lbs., and to make it 200 cents upon each 100 lbs. And 
yet this comparatively unimportant measure has given birth to all 
the fearful predictions of the gentleman from Massachusetts. 

Mr. B. said, if there is a single clause in the bill in perfect 
accordance with the principles and the policy by which its friends 
profess to be guided, it is the one now under discussion. If it 
cannot be supported, we may begin to despair of the passage 
of the bill through this House. 

Mr. B. said it would conduce to a proper understanding of 
the subject, and, in his opinion, at once demolish the greater 
part of the argument of the gentleman from Massachusetts, to 
ascertain and fix with precision the nature of the question under 
discussion. For this purpose, it is necessary that we should dis- 
cover the ad valorem duty to which the present specific duty 
would be equal. In doing so, I shall refer to the authentic official 
documents prepared by the Secretary of the Treasury under the 
authority of Mr. Sanford's law, and not to a private letter, such 
as that upon which the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Web- 
ster) has founded his calculations. The writer of that letter, it 
is fair to presume, must have felt a deep interest in this subject, 
otherwise he would not have taken the trouble of supplying the 
gentleman with information. When we reflect that self-interest 
is the most fruitful source of prejudice, and that, if the letter 
be correct, then are the official Treasury reports altogether de- 
ceptive. I take it for granted that the Committee will have but 
little difficulty in deciding which is entitled to the preference. 

From these reports, it appears that the average cost of foreign 
hemp in the ports from which it was exported, must have been in 
1821, $5.92 per cwt; in 1822, $5.91 ; and in 1823, $5.83. For 
the purpose of my argument, I will assume that its average value, 



1824] DUTY ON HEMP 91 

for the last three years, on board of the vessel at the place of 
exportation, has been $ii8 per ton. This comes within a frac- 
tion of the truth, as any gentleman may discover by making the 
calculation. In order to ascertain what ad valorem duty would 
be equal to the present specific duty of $30 per ton, we must add 
to this $118 the ten per cent, required to be added by existing 
laws, in estimating an ad valorem duty. This would make the 
dutiable value of the article $129.80 per ton; and of consequence 
the present specific duty is equal to an ad valorem duty of about 
23 per cent. The duty proposed by this bill would, therefore, be 
equal to an ad valorem duty of about 34 per cent., and would 
be an addition of only 11 per cent., ad valorem, to the existing 
impost. These simple facts, taken from official documents in the 
hands of every member of the Committee, would of themselves 
be a satisfactory answer to nearly all the arguments of the gentle- 
man from Massachusetts, (Mr. Reed.) His conclusions have 
resulted from mistaken premises. 

But, said Mr. B., I will now exhibit to the view of the Com- 
mittee another statement, derived from the same official source, 
which I venture to predict will astonish every person whose atten- 
tion has not been directed particularly to the subject. In 1819 
there were 25,578 tons of foreign hemp, on which a duty was paid, 
imported into this country. In 1820 there were 46,853 ; in 1821, 
59,963; and in 1822 it had increased to 98,058 tons. Thus, 
under the operation of the existing duty, in the short space of 
three years the increase has been nearly fourfold. 

In this manner, Mr. Chairman, the astonishing spectacle 
is presented to the world of an agricultural nation, possessing 
millions of acres of land capable of producing the finest hemp, 
dependent for its supply of that necessary article upon a dis- 
tant country. There must be something rotten in the system of 
policy from which such consequences proceed. The rapid increase 
of the importation of the foreign article demonstrates that an 
additional duty is absolutely necessary to check its further 
progress, unless you wish to give the growers of the article in 
Russia an exclusive monopoly of our market in preference to our 
own farmers. The additional duty proposed is moderate; it is 
no more than a protective duty in favor of our o\vn agriculture, 
and will not, at least for many years to come, prohibit the impor- 
tation of foreign hemp. 

If, said Mr. B., I understand the great principle of this bill, 
it is that a moderate additional protection shall be afforded to 



92 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

those manufactures, the raw material of which either is, or may be 
made, abundant in this country. Where this raw material is a 
product of agriculture, it has a peculiar claim to our favor; be- 
cause, by that means, the agricultural interest, which, of all others, 
we should the most cherish, and which, in the Middle and Western 
States, is now very much depressed, will be promoted. When, 
in addition to these considerations, we reflect that hemp is an 
article essential to our naval defence, it has claims to our regard 
which are at least equal to any one in the bill. And yet the policy 
which we have been pursuing, if we continue to persist in it, 
will render us entirely dependent upon Russia for our supply. 

The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Reed) has con- 
tended that the domestic hemp is not equal in quality to the 
foreign ; and, in order to establish this position, he has read the 
letter from the Commissioners of the Navy, dated 27th January, 
1824. 

This authority is, I think, exceedingly unfortunate for the 
support of the argument. I will read one paragraph of it, which 
will place the subject in its proper light: 

" The reasons, say the Commissioners, which entitle Russia 
hemp to a preference, are to be found, solely, it is believed, in the 
manner of preparing it for market. In its natural state, Ameri- 
can hemp is, unquestionably, as good as that of any other country ; 
and numerous experiments prove the fact, that, when prepared as 
Russia hemp is. it is fully equal to the best Russia hemp, and, 
indeed, superior to that generally imported. The Russian method 
is called 'water rotting;' that practised in the United States, 
' dew rotting.' " 

This proves conclusively that the American hemp, when 
taken from the ground, is equal, if not superior, in quality, to 
that produced in Russia. The difference is in the manner of pre- 
paring it for market. The Russian hemp is zvater rotted; the 
American has heretofore generally been dezv rotted. 

Is there any obstacle to prevent us from water rotting hemp ? 
Certainly not ; there is water in abundance, for that purpose, in 
many parts of the Union which are well adapted to its growth. 
We have been informed by the Speaker, that the process of water 
rotting American hemp, has already commenced in several places. 
Such an ad(liti(^nal encouragement to the American fanner as this 
bill will afford, should it be enacted into a law, will enable him, 
in a short time, to come into fair competition with the Russian 
hemp grower, and to bring into the home market, water rotted 



1824] DUTY ON HEMP 93 

hemp, of home production, fully equal, if not superior in quality, 
to that for which we are now dependent on a foreign nation. 
Is there any American who would not rejoice at such an event? 

Will this additional duty, said Mr. B., injure the navigating 
interest of the country? I admit that it may, for a very short 
time, enhance the price of hemp a trifle; but it cannot produce 
any of the evils to that interest which the gentleman from Massa- 
chusetts (Mr. Reed) seems to dread. The effect of this measure 
will be to create a competition, not only between the foreign and 
domestic hemp growers, but among the domestic hemp growers 
themselves — and the consequence will be an eventual reduction 
in the price. The experience of this country, in regard to other 
articles, justifies this anticipation. Our capacity for the produc- 
tion of hemp is unbounded. All that is necessary, therefore, to 
make its cultivation successful, is, to direct a portion of the 
domestic industry, which is now languishing for want of employ- 
ment, towards that branch of agriculture. 

Whilst I am up, said Mr. B., I will advert to an observation 
made by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Webster) a 
few days ago in reply to the chairman of the Committee of 
Domestic Manufactures. He stated that the old notions con- 
cerning a balance of trade were idle and ridiculous, and that they 
had been exploded by all enlightened political economists of the 
present day. This may be true so far as it respects political 
theorists ; but no practical statesman, either in our own or any 
other country, has ever acted upon such principles. There can 
be no case put which will be a stronger illustration to show the 
propriety of attending to the balance of trade, than the ruinous 
commerce which is now prosecuted between the United States 
and Russia. In that trade there is an annual balance against us 
of more than $2,000,000. What are the articles which we re- 
ceive from Russia, and which create this balance? Iron, hemp, 
and the manufactures of hemp ; articles which we are capable of 
producing and manufacturing in abundance for ourselves. Will 
any gentleman contend that, if we did supply ourselves with 
these articles, we would not keep among our own citizens that 
balance which we now annually pay to Russia, and thus, as a 
nation, be so much the more rich and independent ? Is it neces- 
sary to use an argument to prove that this would be a desirable 
event ? 

I know, said Mr. B., it has been stated that the trade with 
Russia is circuitous, and that our domestic products are exported 



94 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

to other countries, and there exchanged for articles which the 
Russians receive in payment. The trade to Cuba, and from 
thence to Russia, has been given as an example. This observa- 
tion, however, applies only to a part of our trade with that coun- 
try ; the larger portion of it is direct, and the balance must be 
paid in money. And yet this is the kind of commerce which 
gentlemen wish to continue and extend — a commerce which, 
while it produces a large balance against us, excludes from our 
markets the iron and the hemp of our own citizens, and renders 
us dependent upon foreign countries for these essential articles 
of national defence. If Russia would receive our productions in 
exchange for these articles, then there might be some pretence 
for desiring a continuance of this trade. But, during the last 
year, whilst the value of our imports from that country was 
32,195,870, our domestic exports amounted only to the small 
sum of $51,635. 

If, said Mr. B., this were the proper occasion, it would not 
be difficult to prove that the balance of trade with the world is 
now, and for years has been, against us. I would not attempt 
to do this from the books of the custom-house. I agree with 
gentlemen that they alone do not afford a correct guide upon 
this subject. It is certain that they may exhibit a large apparent 
balance against us, and yet the real balance be in our favor. For 
example, suppose our exports amounted to $40,ocx),ooo, and our 
imports to $50,000,000, if we had no evidence upon the subject, 
except the books of the custom-house, we might fairly conclude 
that our commercial capital, industry, and enterprise, were worth 
imports to the value of $10,000,000, and that thus the account 
would be balanced and the country enriched. But is this the 
case ? Do we not know, in addition to the testimony which they 
afford, that specie, that Government stock, that bank stock of 
the United States, and even the canal stock of the State of New 
York, have been leaving the country to purchase goods and pay 
the debts which we owe to Great Britain? Do we not know that 
the rate of exchange upon London has been largely and contin- 
ually against us for several years? This shows, conclusively, 
that, notwithstanding all the money and the stocks which we have 
exported, funds in England, for years, have been always wanted 
by the merchants of this country. Bills of exchange on Eng- 
land, and on the rest of Europe, have uniformly commanded a 
handsome premium for a considerable period of' time. I would 
ask gentlemen tlie reason why they have been in such demand, 



1824] THE DRAWBACK SYSTEM 95 

if it were not to pay the continual balance against us in our trade 
with the world. Would it not, then, be desirable to diminish 
our imports and increase our exports? This bill, should it pass, 
will, in my opinion, accomplish that desirable object; and the 
additional duty upon hemp, which it proposes, will, in no small 
degree, contribute to its attainment. But, sir, said Mr. B., I 
find I am getting into a discussion of the general principles of 
this bill, which I do not, at present, intend; and I will, therefore, 
desist, at this time, from prosecuting the subject farther. 

The question was taken on the amendment and decided in 
the negative — ayes 69, noes 107. And then the Committee rose, 
and the House adjourned. 



REMARKS, MARCH 25, 1824, 

ON A MOTION TO EXTEND THE DRAWBACK SYSTEM. i 

The questioi} recurring on the original motion of Mr. 
Webster, 

Mr. Buchanan expressed his wish for further light on the 
subject to which the amendment applied. He thought the system 
of drawback sufficiently tried, to justify the proposed extension 
of it. At present it extends only to fish, spirits, and fine sugar. 
He thought the introduction of nankeens of the East, would inter- 
fere with our own cotton factories, as this bill placed the Chinese 
manufactures on the same footing with our own, in the foreign 
market. The commerce with China, he said, was a ruinous one; 
and this amendment went to encourage it, and to discourage our 
trade to France, which was a profitable one. 

Mr. Webster replied. This, he said, was only a transit 
trade; we encourage our merchants to go to China, buy their 
silks, and carry them to South America. The only part of the 
China trade which was unprofitable, was that in articles consumed 
in this country. 

Mr. Buchanan rejoined. He objected to the amendment, 
as complicating the system of drawback. He repeated his argu- 
ment respecting its effect to encourage foreign manufactures, 

^Annals of Congress, 18 Cong, i Sess. 1824, II. iqio-iqh- Mr. Webster's 
motion was to amend the pending tariff bill by providing that the drawback 
allowed on plain silk and nankeen cloths imported in American vessels from 
beyond the Cape of Good Hope should be allowed, although such cloths had, 
before their exportation, been colored, printed, stained, dyed, stamped, or 
painted, in the United States. 



90 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

which, he said, had not been answered. He admitted, that the 
silks imported, went out again; but, why encourag-e their intro- 
(hiction from China, in preference to those from France. 

Mr. Cobb was greatly indebted to the gentleman from Penn- 
sylvania, last up. for his care of the cotton-growing interests; but, 
he should thank him much more, if he would consent to let them 
alone. For his own part, he said, when the friends of the bill 
talked of extending protection to the cotton growers, he felt much 
like the Irish recruit who was forced to volunteer. He objected 
to the amendment as granting an encouragement that was not 
needed ; he had no idea of taking money out of the Treasury 
to put it in the pocket of those wdio were already doing so good 
a business, &c. 

Mr. Fuller replied to Mr. Buchanan. The coloring of 
stained nankeens put[s] them into a form to be exported, instead 
of being consumed at home, to the prejudice of the domestic 
manufacture. He agreed in the opinion, that no discrimination 
ought to be made between French and China silks. He argued, 
however, that the home consumption would not be affected, nor 
the cotton manufacturer be injured by the proposed amendment. 
He made some observations on the French trade, to show that it 
was not so profitable as the gentleman from Pennsylvania seemed 
to suppose. 

Mr. Sharpe replied to the gentleman from Georgia, (Mr. 
Cobb.) All that was asked by the silk dyers, he said, was, that, 
after they had expended their labor on the article, stained and 
defaced in transportation, they should be allowed the same draw- 
back upon it, as, under the present law, would be allowed on it, 
if brought in a perfect state, and exported without any labor at 
all. Let us try the extension of this drawback system on a mod- 
erate scale, and it may be hereafter abolished or extended, as 
migiit be advisable. 

Mr. Mallary replied to Mr. Cobb, and advocated the amend- 
ment on principles of equality. It was no more than just, he 
said, that the benefit of this branch of labor should be enjoyed 
by the dyers, as well as the agricultural labor by the cotton 
grower. He replied to Mr. Buchanan, and advocated the pro- 
priety of making an experiment, in gradually extending the 
drawback system, so as to aid in the protection of manufactures. 

Mr. Poinsett advocated the amendment. Its operation 
would be to enable our merchants to carr\^ the goods of China 
to the South American market, and otherwise, the merchants 



1824] SPEECH ON THE TARIFF 97 

of Britain and France would have the whole trade to themselves. 
It would not injure our manufactures, while it would encourage 

our commerce. 

Mr. Buchanan replied, and stated an illustration from the 
case of hemp and calico; the dyed nankeen of India, he said, 
displaced our cottons in the South American markets. 

Mr. Poinsett, in reply, stated, from thorough personal ac- 
quaintance with South America, that the people of that country 
were of fixed habits, as much so as the Chinese themselves. They 
would go on in their old path and none other. They will not 
take our cottons, but will have nankeens, as they have been accus- 
tomed to; and if we do not carry them there the French and 
English will. 

Mr. Sandford repeated and enlarged upon his objections to 
the amendment, on the grounds of its opening a door to frauds, 

&c. 

Mr. Webster made a few more observations ; and 

The question being taken, the amendment of Mr. Webster 

was agreed to, without a division. 



SPEECH, APRIL 9, 1824, 

ON THE TARIFF BILL.' 

The House then resumed the consideration of the report of 
the Committee of the Whole on the bill for the revision of the 
tarifif. 

The House concurred with the Committee of the Whole in 
the fifth amendment, which is to strike out the following: 

On Russia duck, per piece of fifty-two archeens, two dollars each piece; 

On Raven's duck, per piece of fifty-two archeens, one dollar and twenty- 
five cents each piece; 

On Holland duck, per piece of fifty-two archeens, two dollars and fifty 
cents each piece. . 

The House also agreed to the sixth amendment, which is 
to substitute the four and a half cents, instead of six cents, as the 
duty on cotton bagging. Ayes 84, noes 62. 

The seventh amendment, which is to reduce the duty on 
bar iron, from $1.12 to 90 cents per cwt., being under con- 
sideration — 



Annals of Congress, 18 Cong, i Sess. 1824, II. 2258-2271. 
7 



98 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

A debate arose, in which 2^1essrs. Buchanan, Udree, Brown, 
an<l Stewart, opposed the reduction; and Messrs. Reed, Ran- 
dolph, Tucker, McDuffie, Mercer, Cambreleng, Webster, and 
Marvin, supported it. 

Mr. JUichanan spoke as follows: 

Mr. Speaker, it is not my design to enter into a discussion 
of the general principles of the bill now- before the House. A\- 
though 1 am fully prepared to do so, yet, time has become so 
precious, and so much has already been said upon the subject, 
that T have abandoned any such intention. 

I will, however, take the liberty of asking the Committee 
to attend to some obsen^ations w-hich I shall make, in reply to 
that part of the argument of the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Webster) w^hich related to hemp and iron. The reasons 
which that gentleman urged, with great ability and zeal, against 
an additional duty upon these articles, w^ere, that much injury 
would result from it, to the manufacture of ships and to the navi- 
gation of the countiy. In the course of his remarks, he alleged 
that our navigation had been left dependent upon its own re- 
sources, without any protection from Government; that it was 
in a depressed and declining condition ; to use his ow^n phrase, 
that it w^as barely able to keep its head above water; and that 
the weight wliich this bill would bring to bear upon it, by 
the additional imposts on hemp and iron, might destroy it, or, 
to repeat the gentleman's words, might be the last ounce which 
would break the camel's back. As a consequence from all these 
observations, he inferred that the Navy was in danger of 
destruction. 

In opposition to this argument, I trust I shall be able to 
show, conclusively, that no branches of domestic industrv have 
ever been cherished by the legislation of this country with as much 
care as those of ship-building and navigation; that both these 
branches, although they have suffered in the general depression 
of the country, are now^ in a more prosperous condition than 
any other portion of domestic industry; and that they are 
perfectly able, and ought to be willing, to bear the additional 
duty upon hemp and iron proposed by this bill, even if it should 
amount to what the gentleman supposes. Tf. said Mr. B.. 
T can establish these positions, it will result as a necessarv infer- 
ence, that our Navy is in no danger from the measure now under 
consideration. 



1824] SPEECH ON THE TARIFF 99 

Sir, said j\Ir. B., it is fortunate that the first Congress which 
sat under the Federal Constitution, when they came to legislate 
upon the navigating interest of the country, were not guided by 
the principles which we have so often heard reiterated in this 
Hall. They did not belong to that school of politicians whose 
principal dogmas are, "Let trade regulate itself;" "Let not 
legislation attempt to divert industry or capital from the channels 
in which they are flowing into other branches." On the contrary, 
they believed that the manufacture of ships, and their navigation, 
were interests which required legislative protection, and they 
afforded it in the most effectual manner. 

The third act which ever passed the Congress of the United 
States was that of the 20th July, 1789, imposing duties on tonnage. 
It was afterwards repealed by the act of the 20th July, 1790; 
which, however, re-enacted in substance the same provisions. 
Whilst these acts declare that ships or vessels of the United 
States, arriving from any foreign port or place, shall pay a duty 
of only six cents per ton upon each entn;, they enact that all 
other ships or vessels shall pay a duty of fifty cents per ton, except 
those built within the United States and belonging to foreigners, 
which shall pay thirty cents per ton. The legislative protection 
afforded by these acts, to that portion of our tonnage employed 
in the coasting trade and in the fisheries, was of a still more deci- 
sive character. Whilst ships or vessels of the United States, en- 
gaged in these pursuits, paid a duty of but six cents per ton, in 
each year, those " not of the United States " paid fifty cents per 
ton upon each entry. 

In addition to these discriminating duties upon tonnage, in 
favor of our own citizens, the act of the loth August, 1790. 
added 10 per cent, to the rates of duties imposed, " in respect 
to all goods, wares, and merchandise which shall be imported in 
ships or vessels not of the United States." 

What, Mr. Speaker, was the effect of this legislative protec- 
tion upon our tonnage and navigation ? Let Mr. Pitkin and Dr. 
Seybert answer this question. Mr. Pitkin, in his View, declares 
that — 

These extra charges on the navigation and commerce of foreign nations 
were sufficient to drive from our ports the greatest proportion of the foreign 
tonnage. All foreign nations were affected by the system we had adopted in 
favor of the ship-owners in the United States. The diminution of the foreign 
tonnage employed in our trade was, with very few exceptions, rapid, regular, 
and permanent. 

UOfC. 



100 



THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 



Dr. Seybert. in liis Statistical Annals, bears the same testi- 
mony. He states that — 

Our discriminations operated powerfully in favor of our shipping. 
Vessels not of the United States, of 200 tons burden, on entering our ports, 
paid £20 tonnage duty, and for a cargo of the value of £2,000, they paid 
£iS extra duty, more than did the vessels of the United States, of the same 
tonnage, and laden as aforesaid. These extra charges were sufficient to drive 
from our ports the greatest proportion of the foreign tonnage. All foreign 
nations were affected by the system we had adopted; it seemed to operate 
like magic in favor of the ship-owners in the United States. The dimmution 
of the foreign tonnage employed in our trade was, with very few exceptions, 
rapid, regular, and permanent. 

I will freely acknowledge, said Mr. B., that the wars in 
Europe, and our neutral condition, by placing within our reach 
a large portion of the carrying trade of other nations, assisted 
these discriminating duties in producing their effect upon our 
navigation, with such astonishing rapidity. Dr. Seybert states, 
that " in 1789, our shipping was not sufficient for the transpor- 
tation of the domestic produce of the States; one-third of that 
which was then employed for that purpose, belonged to foreign- 
ers;" and that "in 1793, our tonnage exceeded that of every 
other nation, except Great Britain." 

These discriminating duties, and the unexampled increase of 
our tonnage, alarmed the Government of Great Britain. They 
dreaded the rapid progress of our navigation, and made it a 
primary object to check its augmentation. For this purpose, 
they proposed, in the year 1791, "that British ships trading to 
the ports of the United States, should be there treated, with 
respect to the duties of tonnage and impost, in like manner as 
ships of the United States should be treated in the ports of Great 
Britain." By this means, they expected to crush our navigation 
in its infancy. They well knew, if they could persuade our Gov- 
ernment to cast it, at that period of its existence, upon the ocean, 
without protection, they w^ould obtain what they so ardently de- 
sired — a monopoly of our trade. They were convinced, that our 
navigation could not then endure a competition with the long 
established navigation of Great Britain. 

The statesmen of that day, thanks be to Providence, did 
not act upon the modern fashionable doctrines of political econ- 
omy. They refused to accept this offer of a reciprocity of trade 
between the two countries, which Great Britain had made. They 
did not adopt the principle, that trade should regulate itself. No, 
Mr. Speaker, they cherished and nourished our navigation in its 



1824] SPEECH ON THE TARIFF 101 

infancy, by protecting duties; and, in this manner, infused into 
it such energy and vigor, that it can now fearlessly go forth, and, 
upon equal terms, challenge competition with the world. The 
same kind of protection will produce the same effect upon the 
manufactories which this bill proposes to encourage. 

Dr. Seybert informs us, that these discriminating duties on 
tonnage and imports alarmed the British merchants and ship- 
owners. That was a most favorable omen. In this particular, I 
can congratulate the advocates of the present bill that they are 
equally fortunate. Every British merchant, every British agent, 
and every vender of British goods, within the United States, 
have taken the alarm. Should this bill pass, they know that the 
day is not far distant, when they shall cease to drain from us our 
wealth, and to enrich themselves and the British manufacturers, 
at our expense. 

The House have distinctly perceived the effect of these 
discriminating duties upon the foreign tonnage of the United 
States. Their operation upon that employed in the coasting 
trade was still more decisive. In this trade, the voyages from 
port to port in the United States being, comparatively speaking, 
but short, the burden of fifty cents per ton, upon every entry, 
imposed upon foreign vessels, was so onerous that, in its effect, 
it soon amounted to an absolute prohibition. In this manner our 
own navigation was virtually put in the exclusive possession of 
that important branch of our commerce, long before the act of 
1 817 declared " That no goods, wares, or merchandise, shall be 
imported, under penalty of forfeiture thereof, from one port of 
the United States to another port of the United States, in a 
vessel belonging wholly or in part to a subject of any foreign 
Power." 

It is manifest, therefore, that these acts of Congress went' 
much further in protecting our navigation against foreign com- 
petition, than the bill now before the House contemplates going, 
in regard to any branch of our agriculture or manufactures. 
And yet the representatives of the navigating interest in this 
House, not only complain that it has been left dependent upon its 
own resources, without any protection from Government; but 
they are the first and loudest in resisting the moderate encourage- 
ment which this bill proposes to other branches of domestic indus- 
try. Is this grateful ? Is it generous? Is it just? 

Here, Mr. Speaker, it may be necessary to show in what 
manner the acts of Congress, to which I have referred, gave our 



102 11 IK WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

ship-builders protection. It will be found that the statesmen, 
by w horn they were enacted, had a proper idea of the importance 
of encouraging the manufacture of ships; and, I trust, those of 
the present day are not so degenerate, that they need to be re- 
minded of it by the toast of a Prime Minister of England, which 
the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Webster) has thought fit 
to repeat for our edification. 

We have seen that these discriminating duties upon imports 
and tonnage, in favor of our own citizens, were confined in their 
operation to '' ships or vessels of the United States." To con- 
stitute " a ship or vessel of the United States," it is necessary 
not only that it should be owned by a citizen or citizens thereof, 
but that it should have been built within the same. This is a 
general rule, to which I know of but two exceptions — the one 
in favor of vessels captured by our citizens from the enemy, and 
declared to be lawful prize, and the other of vessels condemned 
for a breach of the revenue laws. There never was a time in the 
history of the United States w-hen an American merchant could 
purchase from a foreign ship-builder a vessel built in a foreign 
country, and have her so naturalized under our law^s as to free 
her from the imposition of these discriminating duties. Of con- 
sequence, the domestic manufacture of ships was as completely 
protected by these regulations against foreign competition as w^as 
our navigation. The ship-builder and navigator moved hand in 
hand. The same encouragement was afforded to both, and the 
same success attended that encouragement. We are now able 
to manufacture ships much cheaper, as I shall show hereafter, 
than they can in Great Britain. 

Let us now pause for a moment, and reflect what w^ould 
have been the present condition of our ship-building and navi- 
gation, had the same system of policy been pursued in relation 
to these important interests, w^hich gentlemen now wish to pursue 
towards our domestic manufactures. England, our great rival, 
possessed tonnage in abundance, capital, and skill. It w^as both 
her interest rmd Iier inclination to overw^helm our rising navi- 
gation. The struggle would have been betw^een the vigor of 
manhood and the feebleness of infancy. Our navigation, with- 
out protection, must have been crushed. It then stood in the 
same relation to Rriti.sh navigation, that our infant manufactures 
(1(1 at present towards the long existing establishments of a similar 
nature in Great Britain. 



1824] SPEECH ON THE TARIFF 103 

The very same arguments which the navigating interest have 
used against this bill, might have been urged in opposition to 
the discriminating duties for their protection. The agriculturists, 
who had produce to be transported to a foreign market, might 
have argued that, if freight could be procured at a cheaper rate 
in an English than in an American vessel, they had a right to 
this advantage; that these discriminating duties were bounties, 
paid by the great mass of the people to the navigating interest, 
and, therefore, they should not be imposed. The shipping mer- 
chants might have said, Let us buy where we can buy the cheap- 
est, and sell where we can sell the dearest. If it be for our 
advantage, permit us. without the payment of discriminating 
duties, to purchase our ships in foreign countries. Government 
should not, by legislation, divert capital from other branches into 
ship-building and navigation. Whenever it shall be for the in- 
terest of individuals to employ it in this manner, it will be so 
employed; and then, and not till then, will it be the interest of 
the nation. 

The true answer to all the suggestions of this nature, which 
might have been urged against our discriminating duties, and 
have been used against the present bill, is, that a wise nation, 
like a wise individual, should be willing to suffer a trifling tempo- 
rary inconvenience in the beginning, that it may attain a great 
permanent good in the end. Should you plant and nourish those 
domestic manufactures only, which are congenial to your country, 
and of which you possess the raw material in abundance; if, in 
their infancy, you shield them, by protecting duties, against de- 
struction from foreign competition and foreign capital ; although, 
for a short time, the price may be enhanced to the consumer, 
yet, before long, it will be reduced below that of the foreign 
article. Our experience with respect to coarse cotton goods 
completely justifies this remark. 

But, upon the present occasion, we should be governed by 
higher considerations than these. I would vote for this bill upon 
the same principle that I would for the erection of a necessary 
fortification or the building of a navy. Are not the woollen 
and the cotton manufactures necessary to our independence? 
Is a nation perfectly independent, without clothing for its people, 
without iron, and without hemp? Is it either patriotic or wise 
to rely for the means of defence upon foreign nations, when we 
possess them in abundance witliin ourselves? 



104 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

In the clays of peace, whilst those nations are all desirous of 
pouring their manufactures upon us, and of exhausting our 
wealth for their aggrandizement, we shall experience no difficulty 
in obtaining supplies. But, let the clouds of war lower over our 
heads, let the nation be deprived of its foreign supplies, and cast 
upon its own energies for its defence, and what will then be our 
condition? The events of the late war, within the recollection 
of every gentleman on this floor, afford the best answer to this 
question. If there ever were a nation which should have been 
taught wisdom on this subject, by the lessons of experience, it is 
our own. 

But. Mr. Speaker, I have been wandering from that portion 
of the subject, to which I promised I would confine myself, into 
the general principles of the bill. The best apolog}^ which I can 
make for this digression is to return to it immediately. 

I admit, said Mr. B., that the navigating interest, in common 
with the other great interests of the country, suffered considerable 
depression in consequence of the general peace in Europe. I 
deny, however, that this depression was at all in proportion with 
that experienced either by agriculture or manufactures. During 
the long period in which the nations of Europe were involved 
in war, we had a large portion of the carrying trade of the world. 
The general pacification terminated this profitable branch of com- 
merce, and left our navigating interest dependent upon its own 
resources, and those of the country. It will be found, however, 
upon examination, that, notwithstanding the disadvantages 
against which it had to contend, the Government and the people 
of the United States sustained it in this crisis. It has always 
been the favorite of our legislation. 

The American tonnage, employed in foreign trade, which 
entered the ports of the United States, during the year ending 
the last day of September, 1823, was 775,271 tons. This is 
greater than it has been in any year ending on the last day of 
December, since 181 1, except the years 181 6. 181 7, 1819, and 
1820. It is nearly 5,000 tons less than in 1817; but it is above 
20.000 tons more than in 1818, and upwards of 5,000 tons more 
than in 182 1. The House will understand that I am now speak- 
ing of the tonnage which paid duties. It will at once be per- 
ceived, that this is greater than our actual foreign tonnage, inas- 
much as the same vessel may. and often does, pay duty more 
than once in a year. If, however, we look at the actual registered 
tonnage of the United States, engaged in foreign trade, the pros- 



1824] SPEECH ON THE TARIFF 105 

pect is equally cheering". It has been gradually increasing for 
several years. I hold a statement of it in my hand, from 1816 
up till 1822, both inclusive; from which it appears that, in 1822, 
it amounted to 628,150 tons. In 18 18, it had been 606,088. 
Between these two periods, its increase was 22,062 tons. Al- 
though, from this statement, it appears that, in 181 6, it was 
800,759 tons, in 1817, 809,724 tons, and that, in 1818, it was 
suddenly reduced to 606,088 tons, yet this is not a true state of 
the case. The Register of the Treasury has certified that this 
sudden decrease arose " principally from the registered tonnage 
having been corrected in 181 8, by striking off all the vessels, the 
registers of which were granted prior to the year 181 5, and which 
were supposed by the collectors to have been lost at sea, cap- 
tured," &c. 

Whilst the present state of our foreign tonnage presents 
nothing calculated to produce despondence, the condition of that 
employed in our coasting trade is flourishing beyond example. 
It has been increasing gradually and rapidly ever since the adop- 
tion of the Federal Constitution. In 1816 it amounted to 522,- 
164 tons. In 1822 it was 624,188 tons. Thus, it appears that, 
in the short space of six years, it increased more than 100,000 
tons. The same quantity of tonnage, in this trade, affords em- 
ployment to a much greater number of sailors than in the foreign 
trade; and the actual tonnage engaged in each is now about 
equal. 

This branch of our commerce must grow with our growth, 
and strengthen with our strength. Human foresight cannot cal- 
culate its future extent or advantages, should it be directed by a 
wise system of policy. The territory of this nation is so vast, 
and its capacities for the production and manufacture of almost 
every article of necessity or luxury are so extensive, that nearly 
all our mutual wants will, at no very distant day, be supplied 
by a free and unrestricted commerce with each other. Besides, 
this trade will be a powerful means of perpetuating our Union. 
Providence, by rendering the different portions of our country 
dependent upon each other, has laid the foundations of that inter- 
course which will bind us together by the adamantine bonds of 
mutual interest and affection. 

Sir, said Mr. B., it must strike every person with astonish- 
ment, who examines this subject, that our foreign tonnage has 
not been greatly diminished since the general pacification of 
Europe. How has this interest been able to support itself at 



106 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

its present aniuuiit. notwithstanding the loss of the foreign carry- 
ing trade? I answer, by the aid of Governmental protection; 
and, although this allegation may be at variance with that of the 
gentleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. Webster,) I hold myself 
bound to prove it. 

In the year 1815 the United States, believing her marine to 
have acquired sufficient strength and vigor to sustain a competi- 
tion upon equal terms against the world, proposed to all nations 
a fair reciprocity of trade. By the act of the 3d of March of that 
year, we declared that we w^ould admit into our ports the vessels 
of every nation, carrying articles the produce or manufacture 
of such nation, without levying any other tonnage or impost duty 
than was levied on American vessels ; provided such nation 
would admit into their ports American vessels, laden with Ameri- 
can produce or manufactures, without imposing any impost or 
tonnage duty beyond that which was paid by their own vessels. 
On the 3d July, 181 5, the United States concluded a com- 
mercial convention with Great Britain, founded upon these prin- 
ciples, so far as respected our trade with her territories in Europe ; 
but her possessions in the West Indies, and on the continent of 
North America, were expressly excluded from its operation. 

The British Government, after the general peace in Europe, 
determined to adhere rigidly to their colonial system, so far as 
their own navigation was concerned. i\lthough they were will- 
ing that there should be a direct trade between the United States 
and their W'est Indian and North American colonies, yet they 
insisted that it should be carried on by their own vessels. The 
ports of these colonies were therefore closed against American 
vessels, and they were entirely excluded from anv participation 
in the trade. 

What portion of our citizens was injured by the exclusion 
of American tonnage from these ports? It was not the farmer, 
who had corn and flour, nor the planter, who had tobacco, nor 
the merchant, who had lumber, to be transported to market. 
To them it was a matter of no importance, whether these articles 
were carried to the West Indies in an English or an American 
vessel. In either case, they could be exchanged for the same 
quantity of rum, sugar, or molasses. It was the navigating inter- 
est alone, which was directly injured by this regulation. No 
other class of society had any concern in the question, except that 
general one, which every good citizen ought to feel in protecting 
the useful establishments of his countr\\ Our navigating interest 



1824] SPEECH ON THE TARIFF 107 

petitioned Congress for relief. What was the consequence? 
For their benefit, we conceived the bold design of compelling 
Great Britain to abandon her colonial system, and to break those 
fetters in which she had for ages bound this portion of her trade. 
On the 1 8th April, i8i8, the Congress of the United States passed 
a law, declaring that " the ports of the United States shall be 
and remain closed against every vessel owned wholly or in part 
by a subject or subjects of His Britannic Majesty, coming or 
arriving from any port or place in a colony or territory of His 
Britannic Majesty, that is or shall be, by the ordinary laws of 
navigation and trade, closed against vessels owned by citizens of 
the United States." The provisions of this act were considerably 
extended by those of the supplementary act of the 15th May, 
1820, 

What, then, were the weapons with which we commenced 
this great undertaking? For its accomplishment, we depended 
altogether upon the patience and patriotism of our people. The 
contest was, whether our citizens interested in the trade with the 
British colonies, or those colonies, could the longest, and with 
the most fortitude, endure its destruction. How much those citi- 
zens suffered, for the benefit of the navigation of the country, will 
appear from the very able memorial from Norfolk, which was 
presented during the first session of the last Congress. The 
memorialists urged the repeal of these acts. They stated their 
conviction, that the attempt to compel Great Britain to abandon 
her colonial system was altogether hopeless ; as she had " often 
and openly avowed her determination not to abandon it but 
with her existence." They declared that, under the operation 
of the existing laws, their farmers, their merchants, their dealers 
in timber and lumber, in fact all classes of their citizens were 
deprived, in a great measure, of their former resources, and were, 
many of them, burdened with debts which they were unable to 
pay. This picture, drawn by the inhabitants of Norfolk, of their 
sufferings for the benefit of our navigation, is applicable to every 
other part of the Union interested in the trade with the British 
West Indies. 

The spirit of the country, however, nobly sustained its navi- 
gation in this contest. The great agricultural interest stood 
unmoved. They were willing to suffer for the benefit of the 
ship-owners. Congress refused to repeal these acts. 

Our bold policy finally triumphed, and, on the 24th June, 
1822, an act of the British Parliament repealed their colonial sys- 



108 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

tern in favor of the United States, and opened their ports in the 
West Indies and North America to vessels belonging to our citi- 
zens. And yet, notwithstanding, the navigating interest com- 
plain that they have been left unprotected by the Government 
to struggle against the world. 

Here, said Mr. B., I will take leave to remark, that I was 
astonished to hear it alleged by the gentleman from Massachusetts, 
( Mr. Webster, ) that this concession, made by the British Govern- 
ment in favor of our navigation, was an evidence that they were 
departing from their restrictive system. No, sir; if it proves 
any thing, it is the efficiency of this system. This concession 
was extorted from them by the adoption of our countervailing 
restrictions, and is strong testimony in favor of the power of that 
policy, when properly exercised, to obtain justice from foreign 
nations. However much English statesmen may talk about the 
new doctrine of the freedom of trade, they take care to act, in 
every case of importance, upon their old principles. It is, there- 
fore, not imprcjbable, that the scraps of speeches made by my 
Lord Liverpool, and others, which the gentleman from Massa- 
chusetts (Mr. Webster) has collected and read to this House, 
ha\-e found their w^ay to the very market for which they were 
intended. Should this bill be defeated at the present session, as 
1 trust it will not, I have no doubt but that we shall have a fresh 
supply of the same articles imported before the next session of 
Congress. In Great Britain they dread nothing more than the 
adoption by our country of that system, which the Speaker has 
aptly styled the American policy. Rest assured, sir, they will 
leave no means untried to defeat it. 

I will mention one other example to show with what care, 
and at what expense to the other interests of the country, this 
Government has fostered, and I admit wisely, its navigation. 
France, immediately after she had extricated herself from the 
long wars in which she had been involved, devoted herself to the 
cultivation of the arts of peace. Among other things, she imme- 
diate]\- directed her attention towards her marine. She was 
anxious to obtain the exclusive privilege of carrying those of 
our productions which she used in her manufactures. For this 
purpose she established discriminating duties, in favor of cotton, 
tobacco and potashes, imported in her own vessels, which are 
equivalent to a tonnage duty of from $i8 to $2i per ton. The 
navigating interest of the United States took the alarm, and 
memorialized Congress upon the subject. To that interest Con- 



1824] SPEECH ON THE TARIFF 109 

gress never lent a deaf ear. On the 15th of May, 1820, an act 
passed, which imposed a countervaiHng duty of $18 per ton, 
upon all French vessels entering the ports of the United States. 
The consequence of this measure was the suspension, in a great 
deeree, of the direct trade between this country and France. 
That profitable branch of our commerce was at once sacrificed 
to promote the interests of our navigation. The House will 
readily perceive to what degree that portion of the citizens of 
the United States, who had commodities to be carried to market 
in France, must have suffered under the operation of this system. 
They, however, suffered without murmuring; because they knew 
that their misfortunes were intended to benefit that class of their 
fellow-citizens concerned in navigation. 

Our countervailing duties on French tonnage produced the 
desired effect. On the 24th June, 1822, the very day on which 
the British Parliament opened their colonial ports to our vessels, 
the convention with France was concluded, which placed our 
carrying trade with that country upon a fair and reciprocal 
basis. 

From this brief history, we have learned that the patience 
and patriotism of the people of this country have obtained for 
their foreign navigation, a signal triumph over both England and 
France; and have opened new and profitable avenues for its en- 
terprise. And yet the Representatives of that interest upon this 
floor, complain loudly that it has been left unprotected. They 
make this complaint in the face of a system of legislation in its 
favor, which is unparalleled in the annals of the country in regard 
to any other object. The Government watched over its infancy 
with parental care, and afforded it protection against foreign 
rivals, whilst such protection was necessary. When it had 
attained sufficient vigor to fear no rival — when a fair competition 
with all nations was that which it most desired, the Government 
obtained for it this important advantage. Now, when it is in a 
prosperous situation, having got every thing which it asked, it 
is the first to cry out against affording a comparatively trifling 
protection to other branches of American industry. Is this grati- 
tude? Is it even-handed justice? Is it doing unto others as 
you would they should do unto you ? 

I shall now proceed to prove, that the navigation of the 
country is perfectly able to bear the additional duty upon hemp 
and iron proposed in the bill, as reported by the Committee on 
Manufactures. In order to establish this position, it will not 



110 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

be necessary to add much to what I have ah-eady said. For the 
sake of the argument, I shall suppose, with the gentleman from 
Massachusetts, (Mr. Webster,) that the small additional duties 
upon these articles will be permanent additional burdens to that 
amount imposed upon our navigation. Even under this view of 
the subject, that interest is able to bear them ; and considering 
what has been tlone for it by the country, ought to bear them 
for the common good, without a murmur. 

The House, I feel certain, will understand, I do not admit 
that these additional duties will continue to be additional burdens 
upon the navigating interest. On the contrary, I firmly believe 
that the domestic competition which must necessarily spring up 
under this protection, will, in a few years, reduce the price both 
of hemp and of iron. 

These additional duties cannot injure the tonnage employed 
in our coasting trade. This portion of our navigation, which, 
in 1822, was nearly equal to that engaged in foreign trade, and 
which must increase rapidly, has no competition to dread. It 
enjoys a monopoly. It will, therefore, sustain no loss in conse- 
(|uence of the additional duties, because, in proportion as you 
enhance the price of the vessel, you will increase the freight. 
The case might be different, if foreign competition w'ere not alto- 
gether excluded. Would it not, then, be just, that this portion 
of our tonnage should be compelled to use the hemp and iron of 
our own production, even at an advanced price? We have 
established a prohibitory system in its favor — should not, then, 
the same rule be adopted in favor of our farmers and manufac- 
turers, at least so far as respects the hemp and iron necessary 
in the construction and repair of the vessels which it employs? 
The bill before the House, however, instead of proceeding 
thus far, only imposes a small additional duty upon these 
articles, and yet it has been denounced, as though it would pros- 
trate the navigation of the country. 

I admit, said Mr. B., that our foreign tonnage must enter 
into competition with the world, and, therefore, it stands upon 
a different liasis from that employed in our coasting trade. 
Lender these circumstances, can it endure the proposed additional 
duties? T answer boldly in the affirmative. The gentleman 
from Massachusetts (Mr. Webster) has stated, that all the mate- 
rials of ship building, except the timber, are cheaper in England 
than in this countrv. 

This mav be, and no doubt is the case. But is not timber 



1824] SPEECH ON THE TARIFF 111 

the chief, and by far the most expensive material in the construc- 
tion of a ship? In England they are compelled to purchase this 
article in foreign countries, and to pay the heavy expense of its 
transportation ; whilst we possess it in abundance at home. The 
consequence is, that a ship of the same tonnage may be built 
much cheaper in this country than in England. We have the 
testimony of the Mercantile Society of New York to this effect. 
The Committee of Manufactures, before they reported their bill 
to this House in January, 182 1, addressed certain questions to 
that Society, two of which, with their answers, I will take leave 
to read to the House: 

Question. What is the cost of a British ship of say 300 tons? What of 
an American of the same force and burden; and, generally, the difference in 
the price of shipping, by the ton, in each country, completely equipped? 

Answer. A British ship of 300 tons, equipped for sea, will cost $24,000, 
or $80 per ton. An American ship of the same quality, will cost $i8,ooo or 
$60 per ton. 

Question. The quantity of iron and cordage to the 100 tons of shipping? 

Answer. It will require 4 tons of iron, 1,500 lbs. of copper bolts, 4>4 tons 
cordage, and 20 bolts of duck to the 100 tons. 

In answer to another question, the same Society state, that 
" foreign vessels would not have a preference, in our ports, over 
American built vessels, unless at a reduction in freight of 25 
per cent, or advantages equivalent, at the port of destination." 

Thus, it appears that the additional duty of $7.50 per ton, 
proposed upon iron by the bill, as reported, on a ship of 300 
tons burden, would amount only to $90, and that upon hemp 
would be equal to about $200. How, then, sir, can this addi- 
tional duty of $290 upon a ship of 300 tons, seriously injure, 
much less destroy, our navigation? Is it possible we can, in the 
slightest degree, be alarmed by such a clamor, when we consider 
that a vessel of this description now costs, in England, our great 
rival in navigation, $6,000 more than it does in our country? 

It has been urged, by the gentleman from Massachusetts, 
(Mr. Webster,) against the proposed additional duties on hemp 
and iron, that if a sufficient quantity of these articles to supply 
the domestic demand, were produced in this country, that our 
navigating interest would lose their freight from Russia and 
Sweden. Sir, said Mr. B., has it come to this? Shall we be 
compelled to purchase articles in foreign countries for no other 
reason but to increase the employment for our navigation ? Are 
all the other interests of the country to be sacrificed, that the 



112 THE \YORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

welfare of this one may be promoted? I trust not. it appears 
to me that the bare statement of this argument is its best refuta- 
tion. We are asked to buy hemp and iron from foreigners— we 
are called upon to transport our wealth to distant countries to pay 
for these articles— and for what reason? Not that we cannot 
produce them in abundance for ourselves ; not that we need them ; 
but simply because the favored class of our citizens concerned 
in navigation want to enjoy the advantages resulting from their 
carriage. You must, sir, purchase the merchandise, that they 
may r'eceive the freight. I am glad the gentleman has come 
out boldly and avowed this position. 

After what I have already said, it will be necessaiy I should 
add a few words only, concerning the Navy ; because it is mani- 
fest that it cannot be injured by the additional duties upon hemp 
and iron, if I have taken a correct view of their operation upon 
our ship building and our navigation. I feel myself constrained, 
however, to make one or two observations on this subject. 

I am a sincere friend to the Navy. One of the earliest 
political maxims impressed upon my mind was, that it would 
be our most safe and natural bulwark against foreign invasion. 
This opinion has been confimied by the victories which it achieved 
during the late war — victories which have equally covered both 
itself and the nation with glory. I would, therefore, warn its 
true friends to have a care how they introduce it into every de- 
bate upon the subject of this tariff. Like all the other institu- 
tions of this country, it must depend, for its support, upon public 
opinion. Withdraw that from it, and it must and will sink. 
Are those gentlemen, then, its genuine friends who wield it as 
the chief weapon of opposition against the present bill? 

If, whenever any measure calculated to promote the domestic 
industry of the country, and to benefit its landed interest, shall 
be introduced into Congress, the cry is resounded, that it cannot 
be adopted, because thereby you ma}- injure the Navy; the 
people will at last begin to believe that there is something incom- 
patible between their prosperity and its existence. If they shall 
at any time be impressed with this conviction, which I trust in 
God they never may, but to which the course of argument that has 
been pursued by the enemies of this bill directly leads, its swift 
destruction will be the inevitable consequence. The people will 
not continue to sustain an institution which they have been taught 
to believe stands as a perpetual barrier against the adoption of any 
svstem. calculated to encourage the agriculture and manufactures 



1824] NAVIGATION OF WESTERN RIVERS 113 

of the country, and for the promotion of whose glory their own 
welfare must be the sacrifice. The Navy has nothing to fear ex- 
cept from such friends and from itself. Recent events have 
alarmed its true friends with serious apprehensions that it has 
become intoxicated with prosperity, and has been relaxing in 
discipline. If, at this moment, when such impressions are abroad 
throughout the land, it shall be made the instrument by which 
this bill shall be defeated, and you should pass the one now on 
your table creating a magnificent establishment of vice admirals 
and rear admirals, the consequence may be justly dreaded. 
Should these measures not shake its standing in the opinion of the 
people, I confess for one I shall be disappointed. Thanking the 
House for their attention, I shall not trouble them longer upon 
the subject, having already said much more than I intended when 
I rose. 



REMARKS, MAY 7, 8, 10, AND 11, 1824, 

ON THE NAVIGATION OF WESTERN RIVERS.i 

[May 7.] The House took up the report of the Committee 
of the Whole upon the bill making an appropriation towards 
removing the sand bars and obstructions to the bed of the Missis- 
sippi, Ohio, and Missouri rivers, and the question being upon 
agreeing to the amendment, which introduces a substitute for the 
original bill — 

Mr. Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, objected to the amendment, 
as too far enlarging its extent, and leaving it without a sufficiently 
definite object. If a system of internal improvement were to be 
adopted by the General Government, he should not be hostile to 
the object of this bill as a part of it. Considering this amend- 
ment as not sufficiently specific, or guarded, he should, if it 
succeeded, be obliged, under present impressions, to vote against 
the bill. 

********** 

[May 8.] Mr. Buchanan, that he might be distinctly under- 
stood as to how far he was willing to go on the subject, stated 
the comparative merits of the bill, and the amendment now under 
consideration. By the bill, an experiment was to be made in 

'Annals of Congress, 18 Cong, i Sess. 1824, II. 2578, 2583, 2584, 2586- 
2588, 2596, 2597. 
8 



114 THP: works of JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

removing- a sand bar; if successful, it was to be followed up 
by other similar operations; if not, the attempt was to be aban- 
doned. The amendment, however, reported by the Committee 
of the Whole, was as indefinite in its terms as language could 
make it ; it pledged the Government to proceed to remove every 
obstruction to navigation from the town of Brownsville to the 
mouth of the river Ohio, and down the Mississippi, and this 
Herculean work was proposed by an amendment to the bill, which 
could scarcely be understood, as read from the Clerk's table. 
Mr. B. said he was friendly to the improvement of the navigation 
of the Western waters, and also to the improvement of that of 
the Susquehannah, the Hudson, and the Connecticut, and he was 
willing that the experiment should be made in the Western 
waters, before it is made in the Susquehannah, though he by 
no means admitted that they possessed superior claims. His 
objection was, not to the object of the bill, but to the indefinite 
terms of the amendment. 

********** 

Mr. Buchanan said, that every amendment offered to the bill, 
proved that a general amendment was necessary, embracing the 
object of making an experiment to improve the navigation of 
the Ohio and Mississippi rivers, which a decided majority of the 
House would be in favor of. To allow of its being properly 
prepared, he moved to lay the bill on the table. 

Which motion was agreed to, and the bill was ordered to lie 
on the table accordingly. 

********** 

[May lo.] On motion of Mr. Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, 
the House took up the bill " for the improvement of the Ohio and 
Mississippi rivers." 

Mr. Buchanan offered, as an amendment to the bill, the 
following: 

That tlic President of the United States be, and he is hereby, authorized 
to cause the navigation of the Ohio river to be improved over the following 
sand bars, or either of them, at his discretion, to wit: the sand bar which 
crosses said river one mile and a quarter below Flint island; the sand bar 
two miles above French island; the bar just below Henderson; the bar below 
Straight island; the bar below Willow island, in the Mississippi bend; and 
the bar opposite to Lower Southerland, below Cumberland island; and, for 
the purpose of ascertaining and directing the best method of carrying the 
provisions of this act into effect, he may employ any of the engineers in the 



18^24] NAVIGATION OF WESTERN RIVERS 115 

public service which he may deem proper : Provided, nevertheless, That 
an experiment shall first be made upon one of the sand bars, and if, in his 
judgment, it shall be successful, then, and not otherwise, he is hereby author- 
ized to cause experiments to be made upon the remaining bars. 

Mr. Stewart, of Pennsylvania, was opposed to this amend- 
ment of the bill, as being calculated to embarrass it, and, in effect, 
to defeat it. He objected especially to the proviso, which requires 
a previous experiment before the appropriation is to be applied. 
The obstacles in the Western rivers are, he said, so various in 
their kind, that an experiment on one could not apply to the rest 
of them — and the President must depend on the opinions of 
others as to the success of the experiment when made, &c. He 
preferred direct legislation on the subject to any contingent pro- 
vision. Mr. S. went on at considerable length to show the pro- 
priety of the amendment adopted in Committee, making Browns- 
ville the point of commencement where the proposed improve- 
ment met the national road, and rendered complete and entire 
the chain of communication between the East and West, &c., 
stating a variety of facts to show the great advantages to the 
West which would result from this measure. 

Mr. Henry, of Kentucky, replied, and advocated the amend- 
ment, on the ground that it was of paramount importance to 
obtain a recognition of the principle embraced in the bill, and that 
the particular modification of it was not of so great importance. 
For the sake of conciliating the opinions of all who were friendly 
to the principle of the bill, he was willing to yield his own opinion 
as to the details of it ; and, with that view, he was in favor of 
the amendment. 

Mr. Mallary, of Vermont, moved to amend the proposed 
amendment so as to cause tivo experiments to be made instead 
of one, &c. 

Mr. Buchanan rejoined — expressed his regret that the debate 
should be renewed — the committee's report was confined to cer- 
tain bars in the river which were not of different kinds, but of 
one kind ; and all he wished was, that a trial should be made on 
one of these before money should be expended on the rest. 

Mr. Trimble advocated the amendment. He was in favor 
of an experiment, and thought it ought first to be attempted on 
the lower part of the river. 

Mr. McArthur was indifferent whether one or two experi- 
ments were made in the Mississippi, but advocated the propriety 
of extending the experiment to the Ohio river also, the obstruc- 



116 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

tions in which were quite as dangerous to property as those in the 

Mississippi. 

Mr. Stewart suggested to Mr. Mallary to modify his motion 

so as to require two " or more " experiments. 

Mr. Mallary did not accept of the suggestion. 

Mr. Kremer advocated the amendment of Mr. Buchanan. 
He had had some experiments in attempts to remove sand bars 
in the Susquehannah, the result of which had been very unfavor- 
able. He therefore wished an experiment made on one of those 

in the Ohio. 

Mr. Hogeboom, of New York, took similar ground, and 
stated the difficulties which had been experienced in the Hudson, 
where vast sums had been thrown away in attempts to remove 
sand bars, without any permanent benefit from the expenditure. 

Mr. Poinsett, of South Carolina, suggested that there was 
a great difference between removing obstructions from sand in 
tide rivers and those where the stream always ran oue way. 
In the former class of streams, the removal of one sand bar was 
succeeded by the formation of others; but, in streams like the 
Mississippi and the upper part of the Ohio, where the water 
always ran in one direction, the case was very different. 

The amendment of Mr. Mallary, proposing two experiments, 
was agreed to — ayes JJ, noes 71. 

Mr. Buchanan's amendment, as thus amended, was then put, 
and carried. 

The several other amendments, reported by the Committee 
of the Whole, were then agreed to. 

Mr. McArthur then offered an amendment in the fourth 
section, to make its commencement read as follows : " And for 
the purpose of improving the navigation of the Mississippi river, 
from the mouth of the Missouri to New Orleans, and of the Ohio 
river, from Pittsburg to its junction with the Mississippi," so 
as to include the Ohio river in the experiment. 

The amendment was agreed to, and the bill, as amended, 
was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading to-morrow. 

[May Ti.] The engrossed bill making an appropriation 
for improving the navigation of the Ohio and Mississippi rivers, 
was read a third time. 

Mr. Williams, of New York, demanded the yeas and nays on 
the question of its passage; and they stood, yeas 155, nays 60. 



1824] SALE OF LOTS 117 

[After the call was concluded, Mr. Burton and Mr. 
Buchanan, both accidentally absent when the yeas and nays were 
called, wished to be allowed to record their votes — the former 
against the bill, the latter in favor of it; but the leave was not 
granted, and, according to the rules of the House, could not be, 
without unanimous consent.] 

So the bill was passed and sent to the Senate for concurrence. 



REMARKS, MAY 18, 1824, 

ON A RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE SALE OF LOTS IN THE 
CITY OF WASHINGTON.! 

Mr. Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, expressed his surprise at 
the course of the debate. The evidence on which the grovelling 
and unworthy charge of peculation was now attempted to be 
brought against the first officer of the Republic had been in the 
possession of a committee of this House ever since last winter. 
He expressed a high sentiment of respect for the character of 
Mr. Monroe, and thought that he was the very last person against 
whom the charge of an avaricious love of money, and base col- 
lusion with a subordinate officer, would ever be brought, or could 
ever be substantiated. He trusted this House, at this late period, 
would not enter into another investigation, probably of groundless 
charges. 



^ Annals of Congress, i8 Cong, i Sess. 1824, II. 2614. 

A committee of the House, May 18, 1824, reported a resolution calling 
upon the President for " a full and complete statement " as to the sale of 
public lots in Washington and the application of the proceeds. 

In a letter to Madison of December 13, 1824, Monroe, referring to his 
losses in the diplomatic service and to the allowances which should be made 
to him by the government to compensate him for his expenditures, said : " It 
is my intention to bring the subject before Congress, with a view to give the 
explanations necessary before my retirement, and to leave them to be recurred 
to, at another Session, when decided on. I have another, and much stronger 
motive for inviting the attention of Congress to a concern relating to myself. 
An attempt has been made to injure me in another form, with which, as it 
has been treated on in Congress, you are, I presume, somewhat acquainted. 
I cannot withdraw and leave this unnoticed. I intend to bring both subjects 
under consideration, with a view to do myself justice, and to protect myself, 
after I am gone, from malignant aspersion. The attempt referred to was 
made in the last two Sessions, by a committee in each, or rather under the 
sanction of such an appointment, and who pursued the object with great 
industry and system, as well as malignity." (Hamilton's Writings of James 
Monroe, VII. 51, 53-54-) 



118 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1824 

REMARKS, MAY 18, 1824, 

ON THE DAY OF ADJOURNMENT.' 

Mr. Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, entirely concurred in most 
of the views of the gentleman from Delaware, but he differed 
from him as to his conclusion. From the information w^iich 
had been given to the House, by the gentleman from Illinois, it 
was perfectly evident, and must strike the mind of every body, 
that Mr. Edwards ~ cannot be expected to arrive here before 
the fourth or fifth of June. If the House waited for his arrival 
at all. consistency and a sense of duty would require them to 
remain in session until he was examined, that the information 
which he possesses may be eviscerated and laid before the House. 
On a moderate calculation, this will take to the tenth of June; 
and, said Mr. B., I ask whether we will delay our adjournment 
till that day on this account, or whether we shall not rather 
adjourn at an otherwise convenient season ? If I thought, that, to 
await the arrival of Mr. Edwards was of any importance to the 
country, or to the distinguished officer wdiose conduct is impli- 
cated by the charges, I would remain here at any sacrifice. But I 
am not of that opinion. When Mr. Edwards presented his 
charges to this House, he referred for the foundation ajid support 
of them to documentary testimony, and to that alone. That 
testimony, with the charges, is in the possession of as able and 
impartial committee as was ever raised in any public body. I 
am persuaded that the committee is, or can be in one or two days, 
ready to report upon that testimony. Now, I ask, how can the 
Secretary of the Treasury be implicated by an adjournment, with- 
out waiting for Mr. Edwards? The proofs are here; the com- 
mittee is diligently engaged in the examination of them, and are 
ready (or can be in a short time) to make their report; and T 
protest against the idea of the House having committed itself, or 
pledged itself in any way, to wait for Mr. Edwards. The House 
has not, in any way. confirmed the decision of that committee to 
send for Mr. Edwards. At the time this accusation of Mr. Ed- 
wards was brought to the House. I tried three several times to 
get the floor, to move to lay it on the table for one day. Had 



' Annals of Congress, i8 Cong, i Sess. 1824, II. 2651-2652. 

* Ninian Edwards, formerly a Senator from Illinois, who complained of 
the injustice done him in a report of Mr. Crawford, Secretary of the Treas- 
ury, on the deposit of public money in State banks. 



1825] TO THOMAS ELDER 119 

this been then done, I am persuaded we should have had no 
further trouble with it. Believing that the House is not pledged, 
and that it is not expected of us to wait for Mr. Edwards; and 
that, as regards our legislative business, we shall be perfectly 
prepared to adjourn on Monday, I will propose that day. In any 
event, the motion of my friend from Maryland ought not to pre- 
vail. If the House determine to wait and examine Mr. Edwards, 
they ought to adopt the views of the gentleman from Delaware, 
and not at this time fix upon any day for the adjournment. If 
otherwise, the earliest day that had been named should be taken. 



REMARKS, DECEMBER 21, 1824, 

ON A BILL FOR OCCUPYING THE MOUTH OF THE COLUMBIA RIVER.i 

Mr. Buchanan moved to strike out the 4th section, which 
is as follows : " That the President be, and he is hereby, directed 
to open a port of entry within the said territory, whenever he shall 
deem the public good may require it, and shall appoint such 
officers as may be necessary for the same; after which, the 
revenue laws of the United States shall extend to, and be in full 
force in said territory; " to which, (though on all other grounds 
highly approving it,) he objected, as interfering with the treaty 
with Great Britain. By that treaty, a free and open trade is 
guarantied, in common, to both powers, for a certain term of 
years, which is diametrically in opposition to the establishment 
of a port of entry, and the consequent demand of duties from 
British traders to the Oregon. 



1825. 

TO THOMAS ELDER.^ 

Washington 2. Jan: 1825. 
Dear Sir/ 

Being released this day from the cares & the follies of the 
world, I sit down with pleasure to devote a portion of my time. 



' Register of Debates, 18 Cong. 2 Sess. 1825, I. 36. 

" Buchanan Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania. The person to 
whom this letter was addressed was then a lawyer in Harrisburg, Pennsyl- 
vania. 



120 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1825 

for ilic purpose of making you acquainted with the pohtics of this 
City. 

You no doubt feel a deep interest in the presidential question : 
& in my opinion the chances are much in favor of Gen : Jackson. 
I write confidentially, & if I were to inform you that I consider 
his election certain, it would not be, what I believe myself. 

The friends of Crawford, consisting of the States of 
Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia & Delaware are apparently 
as determined & speak with as much confidence of his election 
as they did last winter. This however, at least so far as respects 
the knowing ones, can be no more than a mere pretence. It serves 
them as an apology for not expressing a preference between 
Adams & Jackson. 

They believe they hold the balance of power in their own 
hands & no doubt they wish to use it in such a manner as to 
aggrandize themselves & their friends. We have daily rumors 
that a coalition is forming between them & the friends of 
Adams. 

It is thought & in my opinion with truth, that if Clay were 
to exert his influence, he might give the Votes of Ohio & Louisi- 
ana to Adams. 

Some of the friends of Jackson from our State are afraid that 
a combination will be formed between Adams, Crawford and 
Clay : and that the two latter will be in the Cabinet of the former. 
These men however are the warm friends of Calhoun, & they 
must perceive that the next contest in Pennsylvania, if Clay 
should behave himself well, will be between him & Calhoun. 
They are therefore willing to believe any thing which tends to 
make Clay unpopular. His eyes are wide open upon the subject, 
& he is fully aware in what manner he may please Pennsylvania. 
He must also know that if Adams were elected in opposition to 
the will of the people by such a combination both he & the mem- 
bers of his cabinet would at once become the objects of public 
hatred & contempt. For my own part I think Clay will act 
properly ; he may be the better for being watched. He is a man 
of soul. 

The friends of Jackson move on with determined firmness 
& at the same time with a conciliating manner towards all. 
Their chief is a man whose integrity is such that no person would 
dare to talk to him about conciliating the friends of the other 
candidates by holding out to them any offers of Office. His 
declaration is, " if I should be elected I will go into office perfectly 



1825] REMARKS ON WAR CLAIMS 121 

free & untramm[ell]ed." A nobler spirit than he possesses ani- 
mates no human being. 

In my opinion the friends of Crawford cannot transfer 
Georgia & North CaroHna to Adams : and indeed I beHeve that 
all plots against old Hickory will fail. 

The States decidedly for him are — New Jersey, Pennsyl- 
vania, Indiana, (I think) Kentucky, Mississippi, Alabama, Ten- 
nessee, South Carolina, & there is not much of Ohio & Louisi- 
ana. 

The States decidedly for Adams are the 6 New England 
States. New York, Illinois, Maryland & Missouri are doubtful. 
My own opinion is that the two former will go for Adams & the 
two latter for Jackson. 

You thus have the whole ground. The prospect is hopeful, 
but it is not certain. I consider the chances in favor of Jackson 
as two to one. 

There is very little excitement at present in Congress con- 
cerning the presidential question. If however any thing corrupt 
or improper should be attempted it is a Calm preceding a dreadful 
storm. 

There will [be] little or no legislation here during the pres- 
ent winter. 

I wish when you get an hour's leisure you would sit down 
& write me a letter on State politicks. Please give my kindest 
& best respects to Mrs. Elder & believe me to be ever your 
sincere friend, 

James Buchanan. 
Thomas Elder Eso. 



REMARKS, JANUARY 3, 1825, 

ON THE BILL FOR THE RELIEF OF THE NIAGARA SUFFERERS.i 

Mr. Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, said, he rose to make a few 
observations on the bill before the committee, which he would not 
have done, had his views of the subject been exhibited by any 
other gentleman. He said, he would state, as a clear proposition, 
which had not been much disputed in the course of the discussion, 
that this government was bound, as a matter of right, to 
indemnify individuals for the destruction of their property by the 



Register of Debates, i8 Cong. 2 Sess. 1824-1825, I. 121-123. 



Wi THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1825 

enemy, provided such destruction were in pursuance of the rules 
of civilized warfare. If that were not the case, then we were not 
compelled by any principles of public law to make such an 
intlemnity. — Every motive of policy would forbid it. 

Then, said Mr. B. the question is, was the devastation of 
the whole Niagara frontier and the burning of Buffalo, acts 
justified by the laws of war? Can this be a subject of serious 
doubt at the present day? If we pass this bill, we proclaim that 
our denunciations of the conduct of the British army on that 
frontier, which has met the reprobation of the people of the 
United States, and, he trusted, of the whole civilized world, were 
unjust and unfounded. The Congress of the United States will 
declare, that the acts of that army were measures of lawful war. 
and, as such, they were bound to grant indemnity to the sufferers. 
This is the principle upon which the bill has been rested by its 
friends, and the only principle upon which it can rest. 

Let us then, said Mr. B. inquire into the justice of this 
proposition. Had the enemy a right to burn and destroy the 
whole Niagara frontier, because most of the private houses were 
occupied as barracks and places of military deposite? On this 
subject he concurred generally with the views of his friend from 
Virginia, (Mr. Mercer.) If this were established as a correct prin- 
ciple of national law, the consequences would be dreadful, and in 
many cases, the general devastation of the private property of 
unoft'ending individuals must inevitably ensue. War would no 
longer be a civil game between independent sovereigns; but each 
individual of the hostile nations would be liable to ruin by the 
destruction of his property. I will illustrate my views, said Mr. B. 
by an example. Let an enemy land upon our shores and drive 
our army beyond the line of our fortifications, what would then 
be the consequence? Private houses must of necessity be used 
as places of military deposite and as a shelter for the soldiers. 
Once, then, establish the principle embraced by this bill, and 
you justify an enemy in destroying and laying waste the whole 
country over which he advances. Nay, you do more; you offer 
him the strongest temptation to commit such outrages. Such, 
said Mr. B. has never been the practice of civilized nations ; and 
he trusted this government would never sanction the propriety of 
such outrageous acts on the part of an enemy. 

Mr. B. said there was another view which this subject pre- 
sents, which adds the guilt of perfidy to that of the violation of 
the laws of war. Whilst the village of Buffalo still presented a 



1825] REMARKS ON WAR CLAIMS 123 

hostile front to the enemy, a capitulation was entered into by 
Col. Chapin of our army, with Gen. Rial, who commanded the 
British forces. By that instrument, it was solemnly agreed " that 
private property and private persons should not be molested or 
injured." Upon the faith of this capitulation the British forces 
entered the town. The testimony proves, that, before its date, 
they were well acquainted with the fact, that a large body of 
the United States' troops had been quartered there, and that many 
of the houses were places of military deposite. With a full 
knowledge of those circumstances, they entered into the capitula- 
tion : What was then their subsequent conduct ? Instead of 
separating the military stores from the houses in which they 
were deposited; instead of destroying public and saving private 
property, they involved the whole village in one common con- 
flagration. At the most inclement season of the year, in a north- 
ern climate, regardless of their faith, they set fire to the town, 
and drove its inhabitants to seek shelter and bread from the com- 
passion of strangers. And this under pretence of what they well 
knew before the capitulation, that there were military stores 
deposited in many of the private houses. And yet this destruc- 
tion is attempted to be justified by the laws of war established 
among civilized nations. 

Again, said Mr. B. pass this bill, and no member of the 
committee can form any just estimate of the number and amount 
of the claims to which it will give birth. The inhabitants of the 
Niagara frontier are neither better nor worse than their fellow 
countrymen. This bill is chiefly intended for their benefit. It 
is to embrace a tract of country of considerable extent, within 
which the whole mass of people feel a common interest in ob- 
taining from the Government as much as possible. Self love, and 
the prejudices which necessarily result from it, will induce them 
to bring every case in their power within the language of the 
law, and to place the highest value possible upon the property 
which was destroyed. This bill is without limit, and without 
bound; and what will be the extent of the appropriation neces- 
sary to carry it into effect, the committee cannot even conjecture. 
Sir, said Mr. B., I may be asked if I am unwilling to afford 
these sufferers any relief? I answer, without hesitation, I am 
not. They have claims upon our generosity, not upon our 
justice. I would mitigate their calamities, not indemnify them 
for their losses. They have suffered more than the common 
misfortunes of war ; they are therefore entitled to the compassion 



]'2i THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1825 

of a paternal government. I would grant them such relief as, 
whilst it would not be too burdensome on the Treasury, nor 
produce those ruinous consequences to the nation which must 
result from establishing as a principle that we will pay the value 
of private property destroyed by the enemy in violation of the 
laws of war, might yet mitigate their sufferings. I believe I 
know several gentlemen of the committee to be of the same 
opinion. I would give them 150,000 or 200,000 dollars, to be dis- 
tributed pro rata, in full satisfaction of all demands. If, said 
Mr. B., you adopt a principle of this nature, you will at once 
know the extent of your donation, and you will make it the inter- 
est of the sufferers themselves to watch over the claims of each 
other, and see that none are established except those which 
are supported by principles of justice. 



REMARKS, JANUARY 7, 1825, 

ON THE BILL FOR THE PUNISHMENT OF CERTAIN CRIMES 
AGAINST THE UNITED STATES.^ 

Mr. Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, said he highly approved of 
the general features of this bill. It was a disgrace to our system 
of laws, that no provision had ever been made for the punishment 
of the crimes which it embraced, when committed in places within 
the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States. He thought, 
however, that the penalty of death was too severe to be annexed 
to the description of crimes contained in the section under con- 
sideration. 

The power of punishment vested in Government, said Mr. 
B. results from the right of self-defence. Vengeance belongs 
not to man. We should, therefore, be careful not to inflict punish- 
ments of a nature more severe than the safety of society requires. 
In all cases where the character of the crime does not involve such 
a degree of moral depravity in the criminal as to preclude a 
reasonable hope of his reformation, it would be both unjust and 
cruel, in the extreme, to deprive him of life. These principles 
need not be either illustrated or enforced before this committee. 

What, then, said Mr. B. is the nature of the crimes embraced 
by this section? One clause of it declares that the passenger 
on board of any vessel who steals and carries away from it goods 



* Register of Debates, 18 Cong. 2 Sess. 1824-1825, I. 157-158. 



1825] MR. MONROE'S ACCOUNTS 125 

of the value of looo dollars, shall suffer death. Is not this punish- 
ment out of all proportion with the crime ? Is it necessary for the 
safety of society that death should be the penalty in such a case? 
Is it possible that a provision of this nature can, in the present 
improved state of society, be incorporated in our penal code? 
He believed not. The other crimes enumerated in the section, 
although more aggravated than the one just mentioned, are 
chiefly offences against the right of property; and a distinction 
has generally been made between such crimes and those which 
are malum in se, or highly criminal by the laws of nature. 

What, said Mr. B. is the consequence of annexing cruel 
punishment to crimes? The people of the United States are 
humane and compassionate, and when the feelings of society 
are in opposition to the laws, you cannot carry them into execu- 
tion. The humanity of juries is interposed between the criminal 
and punishment. The highest crimes thus often pass unpun- 
ished; and the chance of escape is in proportion to the enormity 
of the offence. Even after conviction and judgment, we know 
by experience how difficult it is to get the sentence of the law 
executed. It is the interest of society, therefore, that, in the 
degree of punishment, justice should be tempered with mercy. 

Mr. B. observed, he had been a member of the committee 
which reported the bill. He might have moved this amendment 
in the committee, but had neglected to do so. He trusted that 
the honorable Chairman, (Mr. Webster,) to whom we were so 
much indebted for the bill, would not object to it. 

Mr. B. then moved to strike out, at the end of the section 
now under consideration, the words — " be deemed guilty of 
piracy and felony, and shall, on conviction thereof, suffer death ; " 
and insert, in lieu thereof, the words, " be punishable by fine, not 
exceeding $5,000, and by imprisonment not exceeding ten years." 



REMARKS, JANUARY 11, 1825, 

ON THE APPOINTMENT OF A COMMITTEE TO EXAMINE THE 
ACCOUNTS OF THE PRESIDENT.^ 

Air. Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, said, that, as to himself, 
he would rather the President had exhibited his claim before 
the House in a precise and distinct form, and demanded its pay- 



Register of Debates, 18 Cong. 2 Sess. 1824-1825, I. 176-177. 



126 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1825 

ment. He did not conceive it necessary for the character of that 
distinguished individual, that he should request a general in- 
vestigation of his pecuniary transactions with the Government. 
But, said he, that was a proper subject for the exercise of his 
own discretion; and he has determined otherwise. What, then, 
is it right, we should do? 

A well tried, and a faithful public servant, who, for eight 
years, has occupied the most distinguished station in this country, 
thinks it necessary for his reputation, to ask of you a general 
investigation into all his pecuniary transactions with the Govern- 
ment. He considers that his character in this particular has been 
unjustly assailed ; and, about to retire from office, he wishes it to 
be placed beyond suspicion before the world. For this purpose he 
has requested of us to inquire into his public conduct, so far as 
it regards his accounts with the Government. Can we, upon 
any just principle, refuse this request? Certainly not. He has a 
right to demand it. 

By what committee, then, shall this investigation be made? 
Gentlemen who think the subject properly belongs to the com- 
mittee of claims, have, in my opinion, said Mr. B., taken a view 
of it much too narrow. It is certain that the message of the 
President asserts the existence of a claim against the govern- 
ment : and if this were all which it contained, it would be a proper 
subject of reference to the Committee of Claims. But, it is 
equally certain, it proceeds much further. It asks an investiga- 
tion of his pecuniary transactions, as a public servant, during 
the long series of years to which he has been in the employ- 
ment of the nation. To divide the message and refer a portion 
of it to one standing committee, and a portion to another, as 
has been suggested, would separate into parts a subject which is, 
in its nature, entire. Mr. B. therefore, preferred its reference 
to a select committee which would possess powers sufficient to 
grasp the whole subject. 

Again, said Mr. B., the message seems to have been mis- 
understood by gentlemen, in regard to another particular. You 
are not asked to legislate upon it. No money is. at this time, 
demanded from you. The President would not make such a 
request, whilst he stands in his present relation to this House. 
All he asks is, that a committee shall investigate and report 
to the House the testimony which he may exhibit, together w'ith 
his own personal explanations. After his term of office shall 
have expired, he does not wish to leave his retirement for the 



1825] WESTERN NATIONAL ROAD 127 

purpose of attending to this investigation. The message ex- 
pressly disclaims any view to legislation during the present ses- 
sion : it only asks that such preliminary inquiries may be made 
as will render his personal attendance hereafter unnecessary. 
Said Mr. B. business of this peculiar nature certainly does not 
properly belong to any standing committee of this House. After 
the testimony shall have been reported, it may be proper, at the 
next session of Congress, to refer a part of it to one of the 
standing committees, and a part to another. 

Mr. B. concluded by observing, that it would be both unjust 
and unkind to refuse to the President the appointment of a select 
committee upon the subject. 



REMARKS, JANUARY 13, 1825, 

ON THE WESTERN NATIONAL ROAD.i 

Mr. Buchanan said, that, since the adjournment of the 
House last evening, he had turned his attention to the compact 
between the United States and the state of Ohio, and he believed 
if the committee would indulge him for a few minutes, he could 
clearly explain its character. 

By the terms of the original compact of 1802, five per cent, 
of the nett proceeds of the lands within the state of Ohio, were to 
be applied " to the laying out and making public roads, leading 
from the navigable waters em.ptying into the Atlantic, to the 
Ohio, to the said State, and through the same ; such roads to be 
laid out under the authority of Congress, with the consent of 
the several states through which the road shall pass." 

It is clear, then, that the compact gave to the United States 
exclusive authority over the application of the whole of this fund. 
The objects upon which they were bound to expend it, were of a 
two fold nature. The first, roads leading from the Atlantic 
waters to the State of Ohio ; and the second, roads leading through 
that State. 

The people of Ohio believed, that the portion of this fund 
which was destined to the construction of roads zvithin their 
state, could be more judiciously and economically expended under 
the authority of their own Legislature, than by the General Gov- 
ernment. In this opinion, they were certainly correct. They, 



' Register of Debates, 18 Cong. 2 Sess. 1824-1825, I. 206-207. 



128 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [18-25 

therefore, asked Congress to grant them this privilege, and in 
pursuance of their request, an act was passed on the 3d March, 
1803, directing the Secretary of the Treasury to pay to the state 
of Ohio three per cent, of the five per cent, fund, to be applied by 
their Legislature " to the laying out, opening and making roads, 
within the said state, and to no other purpose whatever." 

Thus it will be perceived, that the five per cent, fund, which 
had originally been placed under the exclusive control of the 
General Government, was separated into two parts. The two 
per cent, of it was retained by Congress, to be applied to the 
construction of roads between the Atlantic waters and the state 
of Ohio; and the remaining three per cent, was given to the 
state of Ohio, at its own request, to be expended in making roads 
through that state. It is, therefore, manifest, that, since 1803, 
the United States have never been bound by the compact, to make 
any roads within the state of Ohio. That obligation passed from 
them to the Legislature of the state, and three-fifths of the whole 
fund was granted to them, to enable them to fulfil it. Out of this 
fund the state of Ohio, previous to the 24th January last, had 
received the sum of $287,543.94. With what degree of force 
then, or even plausibility it could be contended by gentlemen, that 
Congress are bound by the compact to make this road within the 
state of Ohio, Mr. B. said, he would cheerfully leave for the com- 
mittee to determine. 

Mr, B. said that the next subject of inquiry to which he 
wished to direct the attention of the committee, was, the manner in 
which the United States had executed the portion of the trust 
which remained to them. Have they faithfully applied the whole 
of the two per cent, which they retained, to the construction of 
roads between the waters of the Atlantic and the state of Ohio? 
The amount of it which had resulted from the sale of lands in that 
state, prior to the report from the Treasury during the last ses- 
sion, was $187,786.31, and from Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Mis- 
sissippi, and Alabama, $71,623.11. The aggregate is $259,- 
409.42. 

Congress have expended upon the Cumberland road about 
$1,700,000, or nearly seven times the amount of the two per cent, 
fund of all these states. They did not stop short at a literal 
compliance with the terms of the compact; but have greatly 
transcended them, and acted with the utmost liberality towards 
the western people. That fund has been already pledged to us for 
the repayment of more than $1,400,000. No gentleman on this 



1825] CHESAPEAKE AND DELAWARE CANAL 129 

floor can, for a moment, suppose that we shall ever receive from it 
anything like this amount. In order to realize such a supposition, 
lands within those states must yet be sold to the amount of 
$70,000,000. Yet, notwithstanding, the present bill pledges this 
very fund to reimburse the expense of continuing the Cumber- 
land road from Canton to Zanesville. It is certainly idle and 
absurd for us to place a pretext so flimsy before the public, in any 
act of legislation. Gentlemen who advocate this bill should at 
once abandon its defence upon the ground of the two per cent, 
fund and compact, and support it upon the principle that it is an 
internal improvement, which, independently of these considera- 
tions, should be undertaken at this time by the General Govern- 
ment. 

Mr. B. said that, as he had risen only to advance his ideas 
respecting the compact with Ohio, and the manner in which the 
United States had executed their trust, he would no longer, at 
present, press himself upon the attention of the committee. He 
would merely state as a fact, in conclusion, that the construction 
of the Cumberland road had cost more than $13,000 each mile. 



REMARKS, JANUARY 21, 1825, 

ON THE CHESAPEAKE AND DELAWARE CANAL.i 

Mr. Buchanan said, he rose to make a short reply to such 
of the observations of the gentleman from New York, (Mr. 
Marvin,) as had not been noticed by the gentleman from the 
same State, (Mr. Storrs,) in the able argument which he had just 
finished. 

The gentleman from New York (Mr. Marvin) commenced 
his argument, by stating, that we had not sufficient information 
upon the subject of this canal, to enable us to act wisely. That 
no survey of the route had been made under the act of the last 
session, and therefore this appropriation was premature. 

It was true, said Mr. B. that no survey has been made under 
the act of the last session; but the reason is, that such a survey 
was wholly unnecessary. It would have been a vain labor. That 
gentleman has not examined the evidence before the House with 
his usual care, or he never would have urged such an objection. 
If he had attentively read the report on the subject of the canal, 



'Register of Debates, 18 Cong. 2 Sess. 1824-1825, I. 33i~332. 
9 



130 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1825 

which has been laid upon our tables, he would have discovered 
that the route had been surveyed and re-surveyed again and again. 
Sir, said Mr. B. the whole face of the country between the two 
bays has been literally covered with surveys. After all the infor- 
mation had been collected which it was possible to obtain, so 
l)rudent and so cautious were the gentlemen who had the manage- 
ment of the Company, that they would not finally fix the route of 
the canal, until the engineers of this Government should give it 
the sanction of their approbation. Application was made to the 
War Department for their assistance, and it was promptly granted. 
Gen. Bernard and Col. Totten, with the engineers of the Company, 
carefully examined the different routes ; and, after much investiga- 
tion, finally determined in favor of that one, on which the work 
is now progressing. 

This route, said Mr. B. was not established in accordance 
either with the interest or the wishes of a majority of the people 
of Delaware. The citizens both of Wilmington and of Newcastle 
were opposed to its present location. 

It is too far south essentially to promote their prosperity. 
The truth is, its location was determined much more with the 
view of making it, what it really will be, the principal link in the 
grand chain of internal navigation through the Atlantic states, 
than to subserve the commercial purposes of the cities and towns 
in its vicinity. Had this alone been the object of the Company, 
it might have been accomplished for almost half a million less 
than must now be expended. The work is truly national in its 
character, and it has been projected on a scale worthy of the 
nation. Before the passage of the act of the last session, it 
had received the approbation of the Engineer Department, and 
of the Secretary of War. What then would have been thought 
of the conduct of that officer, had he directed a new survey 
to be made under this act? He deemed it altogether unnecessary. 
In order to establish this position, I will take leave to read to 
the House an extract from his late report made to the President. 
He declares that " the Board was, accordingly, instructed to 
examine the routes for canals between the Delaw-are and the 
Raritan ; between Barnstable and Buzzard's bays, and Boston 
harbor, and Narragansett bay. The execution of the very im- 
portant link in this line of communication between the Delaware 
and the Chesapeake, having been already commenced ivas not 
comprehended in the order." 

And yet, said Mr. B. the gentleman from New York wishes 



1825] CHESAPEAKE AND DELAWARE CANAL 131 

to have another survey, and more information, before he can feel 
himself at liberty to vote for this appropriation. Surely, if that 
gentleman had examined the documents to which I have adverted, 
his candor would have prevented him from using such an argu- 
ment against the passage of this bill. 

The gentleman has objected to the adoption of this measure, 
because, he says, it does not appear that the shares, belonging to 
such stockholders of the old company as were still in debt for 
their stock, have been forfeited. Said Mr. B. I think it will 
appear that the gentleman has again mistaken the fact. What 
says the report upon this subject? It appears from it that, when 
this great work was about to be revived, the directors called 
upon the old stockholders for the payment of five dollars on each 
share, for the purpose of discovering such as might be willing 
to continue members of the company. Most of the shares upon 
which the $5 were not paid, according to this requisition, belonged 
to insolvents and to the estates of deceased persons. These shares 
have since been forfeited, and sold at public auction, pursuant to 
the order of the board. In all cases in which there was a reason- 
able prospect of recovery, the gentleman from Delaware, (Mr. 
M'Lane) informs me, suits have been instituted by the company. 

The gentleman from New York has, therefore, no cause of 
alarm on this account. Self-interest is sharp-sighted; and it is 
for this reason that the money of the Government can never 
be more securely invested, nor more economically applied, than 
when it is connected with that of individuals, and shares the 
same fate. 

The gentleman from New York has urged, as an argument 
against the passage of this bill, that our subscription should have 
been conditional, and not to take effect until the remainder of 
the stock, necessary to complete the canal, shall have been sub- 
scribed. 

I am extremely sorry, said Mr. B. that the gentleman had 
not made this discovery before the bill was on its third reading, 
when it cannot be amended. Had he offered such an amendment 
at the proper time, it would, no doubt, have been adopted by 
the friends of the bill. But is such a provision necessary to 
secure the completion of the work ? Certainly not. The present 
stockholders have already given you a pledge of $700,000, that 
they will not suffer this great national work to sink. After you 
shall have subscribed $300,000 there will then be little more than 
$200,000 necessary to complete it. There is no necessity for the 



132 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1825 

condition proposed by the gentleman, unless you believe that, in 
regard to this canal, the nature of man will be reversed, and the 
dictates of self-interest disregarded. 

I would ask the gentleman seriously, whether he can believe 
there is any danger, that the individuals interested in this under- 
taking, after $1,000,000 shall have been expended upon it, will 
suffer it to sink into ruin, rather than advance the sum necessary 
for its completion? Whether they will voluntarily abandon the 
tolls and the other advantages which will flow from it, and lose 
700,000 dollars, rather than incur an additional expense of 
200,000 dollars? 

The Company have already made contracts for the whole 
of the work. They have thus pledged themselves to the con- 
tractors for its completion. They are, therefore, not only bound 
by their interest, but by the obligation of their contracts to finish 
it. Such a condition, therefore, as that suggested by the gentle- 
man from New York is wholly unnecessary. 

Mr. B. said, that as he had risen merely to answer the argu- 
ments of the gentleman from New York, and not to enter gener- 
ally upon the debate, he would now resume his seat. 



TO THOMAS ELDER/ 

Washington 24 Jan: 1825. 
Dear Sir/ 

A considerable sensation was this day produced in the 
House of Representatives by the circulation of a report that the 
States of Kentucky & Ohio had determined to support Adams. 
In my opinion there is no doubt that such is their present intention. 
Mr. Clay has declared himself to be friendly to the election of 
Adams. You may shew this letter to Hamilton if you think 
proper ; but I do not wish it published. Comment is unnecessary, 
from your sincere friend in haste 

James Buchanan. 
Thomas Elder Esquire. 

[Enclosure.] The intelligence that the Louisiana Legislature had chosen 
her electors is published in the National Intelligencer of Friday, December 
I/, 1824, as follows : 



' Buchanan Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania. 



1825] ELECTION OF PRESIDENT 133 

" The Louisiana Election — There is at length an end to all doubt on the 
subject of the Electoral Election in Louisiana, the only state from which we 
were without certain information. She has chosen her five electors, after 
six ballotings in her Legislature, four of whom will vote for Gen. Jackson, 
and the other, it is supposed, for Mr. Adams. This is what has been for some 
time anticipated. It is now settled, past doubt, that the three citizens from 
among whom the House of Representatives is to make choice of a President, 
are : Andrew Jackson, John Quincy Adams, and William H. Crawford." 

[From Niles' Weekly Register of January 22, i82S.\ Presidential. — The 
following resolutions have been adopted by the House of Representatives 
of Kentucky, "z to 11. In the Senate they had not been acted upon at the 
latest date we have seen : 

Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the common- 
wealth of Kentucky, that the members of the House of Representatives in the 
Congress of the United States from this state, be requested to vote for Gen. 
Andrew Jackson as president of the U. States. 

Resolved, as the opinion of the legislature, that Gen. Andrew Jackson 
is the second choice of the state of Kentucky for the next President of the 
United States; that a very large majority of this state prefers General Jack- 
son to Mr. Adams or Mr. Crawford, and that the members of the House of 
Representatives in the Congress of the U. States will, by complying with 
the request herein signified, faithfully and truly represent the feelings and 
wishes of the good people of Kentucky. 

Resolved, That the Governor of the commonwealth of Kentucky be 
requested to forward, forthwith, a copy of the foregoing resolutions to each 
of onr representatives in the Congress of the United States. 



REMARKS, FEBRUARY 2, 1825, 

ON THE ELECTION OF PRESIDENT.i 

Mr. Buchanan said he rose with diffidence to express his 
opinion upon this subject. Like his friend from Delaware, (Mr. 
M'Lane,) he disclaimed the intention of making any remark 
which might have an allusion to the peculiar situation of the 
members of this House, in regard to the approaching election. 
He considered the present to be a question of great importance, 
and that its decision would establish a precedent, which, in future 
times, might have a powerful influence upon the interests of this 
country. He was sorry to say he had arrived at a conclusion in 
direct opposition to that of his friend from Delaware, (Mr. 
M'Lane.) The reasons which had led him to that result, he 
would state to the House. 

The American people, said Mr. B. have a right to be present 
and inspect all the proceedings of their representatives, unless 



Register of Debates, 18 Cong. 2 Sess. 1824-1825, I. 422-423. 



134 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1825 

their own interest forbids it. In relation to our concerns with 
foreign Governments, it may become necessary to close our 
galleries. Our designs, in such cases, might be frustrated, if 
secrecy were not, for a time, preserved. Whenever there shall be 
disorder in the gallery, we have also a right to clear it, and are 
not bound to suffer our proceedings to be interrupted. Except 
in these cases, he at present could recollect none which would 
justify the House in excluding the people. 

In electing a President of the United States, said Mr. B. 
we are, in my opinion, peculiarly the representatives of the people. 
On that important occasion we shall, emphatically, represent their 
majesty. We do not make a President for ourselves only, but 
also for the whole people of the United States. They have a 
right to insist that it shall be done in public. He, therefore, pro- 
tested against going into a secret conclave, when the House 
should decide this all important question. He said that the doc- 
trine of the gentleman from Delaware, (Mr. M'Lane,) was 
altogether new to his mind. That gentleman has alleged that 
we are called upon to elect a President, not as the representatives 
of the people, but by virtue of the constitution. Sir. said Mr. B. 
who created the constitution? Was it not the people of the 
United States ? And did they not, by this very instrument, dele- 
gate to us, as representatives, the power of electing a President 
for them? It is by virtue of this instrument we hold our seats 
here. And. if there be any case in which we are bound to obey 
their will, this is peculiarly that one. To them we must be 
answerable for the proper exercise of this duty. 

What are the consequences, said Mr. B. which will result 
from closing the doors of the gallery? We shall impart to the 
election an air of mystery. We shall give exercise to the imagin- 
ations of the multitude, in conjecturing what scenes are acting 
within this Hall. Busy Rumour, with her hundred tongues, will 
circulate reports of wicked combinations, and of corruption, which 
have no existence. Let the people see what we are doing; let 
them know that it is neither more nor less than putting our 
ballots into the boxes, and they will soon become satisfied with 
the spectacle, and retire. 

The gentleman from Delaware, (Mr. M'Lane.) has urged 
upon us the precedent which now exists on this subject. Mr. B. 
said, he revered the men of former days, by whom this precedent 
was established. He had good reason, however, to believe, that 
the intense excitement which existed at that time amon? the 



1825] ELECTION OF PRESIDENT 135 

people, at the Seat of Government, was occasioned, in a consid- 
erable degree, by their exclusion from the gallery. — They came in 
crowds into the House, but were prohibited from entering the 
Hall. Currents and counter-currents of feeling kept them con- 
tinually agitated. New conjectures of what was doing within, 
were constantly spreading among them. Mystery always gives 
birth to suspicion. If those people had been permitted to enter, 
much of the excitement which then prevailed would never have 
existed. 

It has been said, that there might, and probably would be 
disorder, if we admitted the people into the gallery. Mr. B. 
could scarcely believe this possible. He had too high an opinion 
of the American people to suffer himself to entertain such an 
apprehension. Should we, however, be mistaken, where is the 
power of the Speaker ? Where that of the House ? We can then 
turn them out, and we shall then have a sufificient apology for 
doing so. But, to declare, in the first instance, that they shall 
be excluded, upon the request of any one out of twenty-four 
states, would be a libel both upon the people of the United States 
and the members of this House. Mr. B. asked pardon for this 
expression, if it were considered too harsh. 

Mr. B. said he knew well his friend from Delaware was 
willing that all his conduct, in regard to the Presidential question, 
should be exhibited before the public, and that it was principle, 
and principle alone, which had suggested his remarks. 

That which gives this subject its chief importance, Mr. B. 
said, is the precedent. He was anxious that it should be settled 
on sure foundations. If the rule, in its present form, should be 
adopted, it may, and probably will, be dangerous in future times. 
At present, our Republic is in its infancy. At this time, he enter- 
tained no fear of corruption. In the approaching election, it can 
therefore make but little difference, whether the gallery shall be 
opened or closed. But the days of darkness may, and, unless we 
shall escape the fate of all other Republics, will come upon us. 
Corruption may yet stalk abroad over our happy land. When she 
aims a blow against the liberties of the people, it will be done in 
secret. Such deeds always shun the light of day.— They can be 
perpetrated, with a much greater chance of success, in the secrecy 
of an electoral conclave, than when the proceedings of the House 
are fully exposed to the public view. Let us then establish a 
precedent, which will have a strong tendency to prevent corrupt 
practices hereafter. 



136 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1825 

Mr. B. concluded by observing that, whether we regard the 
precedent to be set, the nature of our Government, our own char- 
acter, or that of the people whom we represent, they all conspire 
to induce us to adopt the amendment. 



REMARKS, FEBRUARY 21, 1825, 

ON DRAWBACK DUTIES.i 

Mr. Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, professed himself in favor 
of the bill, as having a favorable influence on the trade of this 
country, especially to South America — it enabled the merchant 
to go into that market two per cent, cheaper than at present, and 
argued the policy of securing that trade as speedily as possible. 
He replied to Mr. Trimble, and concluded that no law, proper in 
itself, should be objected to, because it happened to benefit for- 
eigners. He thought the bill would have a beneficial effect on 
the manufacturing interest. 



REMARKS, MARCH 1, 1825, 

ON THE BILL FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF PIRACY. 2 

Mr. Buchanan then moved to amend the bill, by reducing 
the number of sloops of war from ten to five, and the sum appro- 
priated from $500,000, to $425,000. 

In support of his motion, Mr. B. observed, that the present 
was a bill for the suppression of piracy, and not for the increase of 
the Navy. He thought that if Congress gave the Executive all 
he asked, they certainly did all that was needed. The Secretary 
of the Navy asked only for four sloops of war; he was willing to 
give him five. (Here Mr. B. quoted the letter of the Secretary.) 
He thought it was wisest in Congress to keep the power in their 
own hands. It was manifest, that only 5 sloops could be built, 
for the $500,000 would build no more — $425,000 was sufficient 
for this purpose, and he therefore proposed that sum. He did 
not wish to be understood as holding the opinion that it was 
not proper to increase the Navy, but he did not think it proper to 
authorize so large an increase of it at the present time. 



' Register of Debates, 18 Cong. 2 Sess. 1824-1825, I. 636. 
"' Register of Debates, 18 Cong. 2 Sess. 1824-1825, I. 729. 



1825] BILL TO SUPPRESS PIRACY 137 

REMARKS, MARCH 1, 1825, 

ON THE BILL TO SUPPRESS PIRACY.' 

Mr. Buchanan observed, in reply, that he was sorry at this 
late hour to come in collision with the gentleman from Massachu- 
setts. He could not but notice, however, that that gentleman 
had not thought fit to reply to what he had advanced as a 
principal argument in favor of the amendment he proposed, that 
only 500,000 dollars were appropriated, and five sloops of war 
would cost $425,000. Could we not repose confidence in the next 
Congress ; could we not leave them to judge, since only five ships 
could be built this year, whether five more would be wanting next 
year? It was vain to say that a number of ships should be built, 
not exceeding ten, and then to give means only for five. If ten 
were intended to be given, they would cost $850,000. Perhaps it 
was not held politic to spread such an amount before the people. 
The Senate had passed a bill for ten sloops of war in the early 
part of last session. But, during all of last session, and all of the 
present, until now, the House had refused to take up that bill. 
Was it proper, at this late moment, to enter into a discussion 
about the increase of the Navy ? We had already spent eight mil- 
lions on the Navy — he wanted to know how this had been spent ; 
and whether the ships which had been built corresponded with 
the law\ He wanted to know whether the ancient discipline was 
still continued. He doubted the propriety of incorporating in a 
bill for the suppression of piracy, provisions which went, in fact, 
to increasing the Navy. 

^ 5!; ^ ;;< ^ ;;< ^ * * 5K 

Mr. Buchanan, in reply, said the gentleman appeals to me, 
but I can assure him he appeals in vain. He, however, has been 
chosen a member of the next Congress— I also have ; and if he 
shall then make to me the same appeal, I promise him that appeal 
shall not be made in vain. 

^ ^ ;i« ^ * * * * * * 

Mr. Buchanan observed, in reply to Mr. Webster, that that 
gentleman had begun his speech in a manner he did not expect 
from him, and had expressed himself as much amazed that he 
(Mr. B.) should not be able to comprehend how the money 

'Register of Debates, 18 Cong. 2 Sess. 1824-1825, I. 730, 72,^^, 732. 



138 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1825 

appropriated is spent. He must have been very stupid indeed, to 
doubt for a moment that any sum that we may appropriate would 
be spent by the Navy Department. But he knew that timber 
was already bought, and he did not see the necessity of appro- 
priating money to buy it. He, too, was for beginning before 
we end. He would begin now with five ships, and end next Con- 
gress with five more. He was sorry to repeat an argument he 
had already more than once employed : but he could not compre- 
hend why there should be so much tenacity manifested for build- 
ing ten ships, when the 500,000 appropriated, would not build 
them. But he presumed the plan was now, to get the House to 
say, that the ships shall be built, and then to say, that next session 
the money required must be appropriated. He was opposed to 
this proceeding. Why should not the House retain its discretion, 
as to granting or not granting the means to build the other five, 
if at next session we should deem them necessary? 



TO GENERAL JACKSON/ 

May 29, 1825. 
My Dear General : 

I write this letter from Mercersburg, being now on a visit 
to my mother and the family. I have no news of any importance 
to communicate, but both inclination and duty conspire to induce 
me to trouble you occasionally with a few lines, whilst you must 
be gratefully remembered by every American citizen who feel.'^ 
an interest in the character of his country's glory. 

You have imposed additional obligations upon me by the 
uniform kindness and courtesy with which you have honored me. 

In Pennsylvania, amongst a vast majority of the people, 
there is but one sentiment concerning the late Presidential elec- 
tion. Although they submit patiently, as is their duty, to the 
legally constituted powers, yet there is a fixed and determined 
resolution to change them as soon as they have the constitutional 
power to do so. In my opinion, your popularity in Pennsyl- 
vania is now more firmly established than ever. Many persons 
who heretofore supported you did it cheerfully from a sense of 
gratitude, and because they thought it would be disgraceful to 
the people not to elevate that candidate to the Presidential Chair, 



^ Curtis's Buchanan, I. 44. 



1825] FROM GENERAL JACKSON 139 

who had been so great a benefactor of the country. The slanders 
which had been so industriously circulated against your character 
had, nevertheless, in some degree affected their minds, although 
they never doubted either your ability or patriotism, yet they 
expressed fears concerning your temper. These have been all 
dissipated by the mild prudence and dignity of your conduct last 
winter, before and after the Presidential election. The majority 
is so immense in your favor that there is little or no newspaper 
discussion on the subject. I most sincerely and fervently trust and 
hope that the x^lmighty will preserve your health until the period 
shall again arrive when the sovereign people shall have the power 
of electing a President. 

There never was a weaker attempt made than that to con- 
ciliate the good opinion of Pennsylvania in favor of the adminis- 
tration by the appointment of Mr. Rush, although no appointment 
could have produced the effect desired ; yet, if the President had 
selected Mr. Sergeant, he would have chosen a man who had 
been his early and consistent friend, and one whose character 
for talents and integrity stands high with all parties in this State. 
Mr. Rush was a candidate for the office of elector on the Craw- 
ford ticket. I verily believe his appointment wall not procure for 
the administration, out of the city of Philadelphia, twenty new 
friends throughout the State. In that city their additional 
strength is limited to John Binns and a few of his devoted fol- 
lowers. 

I hope Mrs. Jackson, ere this, has been restored to her accus- 
tomed health. When I left her, I felt some apprehensions in rela- 
tion to the issue of her disease. Please to present to her my 
kindest and best respects, and believe me to be ever your sincere 
friend, 

James Buchanan. 



FROM GENERAL JACKSON/ 

Hermitage, June 25, 1825. 

Dear Sir: 

I have the pleasure to acknowledge the receipt of your kind letter of the 
29th ult., which has just reached me. 

That respect which I formed for your character on our first acquaintance 
increased with our friendly intercourse, and to you was only extended what 



* Curtis's Buchanan, I. 45. 



140 THE AVORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1825 

I viewed a debt due to your merit as a gentleman of intelligence and urban- 
ity. It is, therefore, a source of much gratification to me to receive a letter 
from you, detailing the friendly feelings of the citizens of Pennsylvania 
toward me. 

It is gratifying to hear, through you, that the confidence and support 
which the majority of the citizens of Pennsylvania expressed for me, by 
their vote on the Presidential question, will not be withdrawn by the artful 
and insidious efforts of my enemies. This is another evidence of the firmness 
and indulgence of the freemen of Pennsylvania. This organized plan of 
calunmy and slander, levelled against me by the unprincipled and wicked, 
will not owe its defeat to any effort of mine, unless it be that which always 
attends truth and a conscious rectitude of conduct, when submitted to an 
untrammelled and honest public. The continued good opinion, therefore, of 
my fellow-citizens of Pennsylvania, lays me under additional obligations, 
whilst it connects my name with another guaranty of the wisdom of our 
government — I mean in furnishing to posterity another example of the weak- 
ness of demagogues when endeavoring to advance to power upon the destruc- 
tion of innocence. 

It is much to the honor of the good citizens of Pennsylvania that they 
calmly submit to the legally constituted power ; this all good citizens will do, 
who love a government of laws, although they show much disapprobation at 
the means by which that power was obtained, and are determined to oppose 
the men who obtained power by what they believe illicit means. The great 
constitutional corrective in the hands of the people against usurpation of 
power, or corruption by their agents, is the right of suffrage : and this, when 
used with calmness and deliberation, will prove strong enough. It will per- 
petuate their liberties and rights, and will compel their representatives to 
discharge their duties with an eye single to the public interest, for whose 
security and advancement government is constituted. 

I have not yet been so fortunate as to fall in with I\Ir. Frazer, although I 
have made inquiry for him. Should I meet with him, be assured it will be a 
gratification to me to extend to him those attentions due to any of your 
friends. 

I regret very much that the bad health of Mrs. J. prevented me from 
passing through your hospitable town. I assure you, could we have done so, 
it would have afforded Mrs. J. and myself much pleasure. Mrs. J.'s health 
is perfectly restored. So soon as I got her to breathe the mountain air of 
Pennsylvania, she mended by the hour. 

We are also blessed, in this section of the country, with the promise of 
fine crops. Our cotton promises a good crop. This is six days earlier than 
ever knowm in this section of country. 

Mrs. J. joins me in kind salutations to you, with our best wishes for your 
happiness. Your friend, 

Andrew J.\ckson. 



1825] CASE OF COMMODORE PORTER 141 

REMARKS, DECEMBER 15 AND 16, 1825, 

ON THE CASE OF COMMODORE PORTER.' 

[Dec. 15.] The House proceeded to the consideration of 
the following resolution, yesterday submitted by Mr. Buchanan: 

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Navy be directed to lay before this 
House the proceedings of the late Court of Inquiry and Court Martial, in 
relation to the case of Commodore Porter. 

Mr. Buchanan said, he had no other motive in calling for the 
Proceedings in the case of Commodore Porter, than to give pub- 
licity to those Proceedings. Not conceiving, however, that the 
fact of reciprocation of copies of printed papers between the two 
Houses, obviated the propriety of this House calling, indepen- 
dently of the proceedings in the Senate, for any papers it desired 
to possess, Mr. B. still desired the question to be taken on the 
passage of this resolution. He understood that the documents 
which it embraced were already printed, and it could do no harm 
to shew, by the resolution, the disposition of the House to have 
them before it. If any objection existed to the object of the 
resolution, Mr. B. said he would, on its being stated, endeavor to 
answer it ; but he did not deem it either correct or politic to antici- 
pate objections to his proposition. 

:K :!< >|< * * ♦ * * * * 

Mr. Buchanan said, he did not perceive, himself, that this 
amendment was necessary. But it could certainly do no harm, 
and would make the resolution more comprehensive. He there- 
fore accepted the amendment as a part of his motion, and agreed 
that it should form a part of the resolution. 

Mr. Webster inquired whether it was not usual, in calling 
on the President for copies of correspondence, to refer the matter 
to the exercise of a discretion on the part of the President, as to 
the propriety of making the communication asked for. To com- 
municate correspondence, without reserve, might, in some cases, 
and possibly in this, be prejudicial to the public interest. 

Mr. Buchanan said he was perfectly willing to assent to any 
amendment whatever of the resolution, which did not go to defeat 
its object. 

' Register of Debates, 19 Cong, i Sess. 1825-1826, II., part i, pp. 806, 807, 
808, 815-817. 



142 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1825 

Mr. Webster suggested the propriety of letting the resolve 
lie on the table till to-morrow, to give time to ascertain whether 
the House would not receive the papers for which the resolution 
proposed to call, without passing the resolution. 

Mr. Buchanan said he had no wish to press the resolution, 
but he could not see what objection there could be to acting on 
it now. The information called for by the Senate was for the 
Senate's use, and not for this House. The information ought to 
be regularly before the House, and Mr. B. therefore wished his 
motion, as it had been introduced, to pass. Why not pass it to- 
day? At the same time, as the gentleman from Massachusetts 
seemed to wish the postponement, Mr. B. said he would not press 
it on the House at present ; but, if it were laid on the table, he 
should think it his duty to call up the resolution to-morrow, that 
the sense of the House might be taken upon it. 

^ sj: ^ ^ ^ ;|< ;|c sjc ;[: jjc 

[Dec, 1 6.] On motion of Mr. Buchanan, the House took 
up (not without a number of negative voices) the resolution 
offered by him the day before yesterday, calling for the Proceed- 
ings of the Court Martial and the Court of Inquiry, recently held 
upon Commodore David Porter. 

Mr. Buchanan said, that when he had the honor of submitting 
this resolution, he had supposed that it would pass, as a matter 
of course, and not a word be necessary to be said upon the subject. 
So firmly was he of that opinion, that he thought it needless to 
trespass on the attention of the House, to show any reasons for 
its passage. The unwillingness which had been shown to act 
upon it, made it his duty now to submit a few observations in 
reference to it; having done which, he should submit it to the 
pleasure of the House. 

What, asked Mr. B. is the purport of this resolution? It 
proposes a call on the Secretary of the Navy, for a copy of the 
Proceedings of the late Court Martial and Court of Inquiry in 
the case of Commodore Porter. Is this, said he, a novel request? 
No; it is of a nature of others which have repeatedly met the 
approbation of this House. Within my own distinct recollection, 
three cases of this kind occurred during the last session of Con- 
gress, in which the calls were granted as matter of course, viz : 
in the case of Major Babcock, that of Lieutenant Weaver, and 
that of Lieutenant Conner. And, sir, ought they not to have 
been granted? The question is not now upon the printing of 



1825J CASE OF COMMODORE PORTER 143 

these documents — though, if it were, he beHeved he could satisfy 
the House of the propriety of their being printed, and that an 
objection to calHng for information, because of the contingency, 
that it might, when obtained, be ordered to be printed, was an 
argimient entitled to no weight at all — the question is, how are 
we, who want it, to obtain this information, but by availing our- 
selves of the authority of this House to obtain it? As to apply- 
ing personally at the Department for it, Mr. B. said an individual 
member of this House had no more right to require information 
from any of the Departments, than any other individual. Was it 
proper, he asked, that members of this House should go, one 
after the other, to the Departments, and ask, each for himself, 
to see papers, and obtain information which concerns the welfare 
of the whole? Certainly not. The practice, therefore, has been, 
and he trusted would continue to be, when a member of this 
House, representing, as each member does, an important portion 
of this community, calls for a public paper, he shall have it by a 
vote of this House. It had been suggested yesterday, and with 
great deference he must say the suggestion was wholly out of 
order, that these papers had been called for by the Senate, and 
that, therefore, it was not necessary to call for them here. But, 
said he, is there any other mode in which the information could 
be properly in possession of this House, than by calling for it 
ourselves? Is the Head of a Department responsible to us if he 
do not send to the Senate all the documents in any case? Far 
be it from me to say, that the respectable Head of that Depart- 
ment would in any case withhold documents proper to be com- 
municated — I have no such opinion of him ; but, as an argument, 
this supposition may serve to show that this House ought itself 
to call for whatever papers it has occasion for. 

It had also been suggested, that this House ought not to call 
for any documents on any Department of the Government, unless 
the Member moving the call will avow that he has a specific 
object in doing it. Now, Mr. B. said, it was obvious that a 
Member must see and know the contents of a document before he 
can judge whether or not it be proper to found any measure upon 
them. In the present case, Mr. B. said, he did not meditate any 
ulterior proceeding. He had called for these documents, and 
he had expected that they would have been granted as a matter 
of course, for the purpose of examining them critically for him- 
self, and whether any ulterior proceeding was to be moved, or not. 
would depend on the aspect of the documents after they were 
submitted. 



144 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1825 

What, then, said Mr. B. is the nature of the question pre- 
sented by this resolution ? There is a gallant officer of our Navy, 
who has been tried by a Court Martial, and convicted — whether 
correctly or not, I do not wish to express an opinion; I cannot, 
until I see the documents, to enable me to form one. It is an 
unquestionable fact, that, in regard to that trial and its result, 
the country is divided in sentiment. The friends of this officer — 
an officer who has shed lustre on the character of our Navy; 
whose fame is such that our sister Republics vie with one another 
in offering him inducements to engage in their service — the 
friends of this officer come forward, and ask that the proceedings 
of the Courts in his case should be laid before the Representative 
tribunal. Is this an unreasonable request? Is it an argument 
against complying with such a request, that our impoverished and 
embarrassed Treasury may be called upon to defray the expense 
of printing these papers when received? There is, in this coun- 
try, a tribunal higher than this — which reviews the proceeding 
of every other, and judges both the accuser and the accused 
according to their desert — the tribunal of public opinion. Is 
nothing due to that tribunal? Is it not due to the People that 
these papers should be laid before them? That, said Mr. B. is 
all that I ask; and if any one supposes that I had any view, in 
offering this resolution, but to obtain correct information for 
myself and others who desire it, they are entirely mistaken. And, 
Mr. B. said, if he understood rightly, the expense of printing the 
papers, when received, need not be incurred in this case: for, so 
proper had the Secretary of the Navy considered it that the 
proceedings of the Court Martial should be made public, he had 
already caused them to be printed and held in readiness to be 
laid before Congress, if called for. 

It had been suggested, yesterday, that this call for papers 
ought to have been addressed to the President of the United 
States, with a reservation to that officer of a discretion as to the 
propriety of communicating the papers called for. 

Mr. B. said, on referring to the Journal of the last session, 
he found that, in the case of Major Babcock, the Secretary of War 
had been called upon to communicate the proceedings of the 
Court; so that there was nothing unusual in the form of the 
proceeding now proposed. Nor could he believe that there were 
any documents connected with the trial in the case of Commodore 
Porter that it would be improper to communicate to Congress. 
If the respectable gentleman from Massachusetts thought other- 



1825] COLLECTION OF CUSTOMS 145 

wise, however, he could move an amendment to that effect. Mr. 
B. concluded by remarking, that he would rather that this resolu- 
tion should have passed without a word from him in relation to 
it, and he now submitted it entirely to the pleasure of the House. 
The question was then taken on the passage of the resolution, 
and was decided, without a division, in the affirmative. 



REMARKS, DECEMBER 27, 1825, 

ON LOSSES IN THE COLLECTION OF CUSTOMS.' 

Mr. Buchanan said, he thought it due to the Collector of the 
Port of Philadelphia, that the amendment proposed by the gentle- 
man from Virginia should pass. If a long life of unsuspected 
integrity and public usefulness could constitute a claim to the 
favorable consideration of the House, this amendment should be 
adopted in justice to that officer. The resolution introduced by 
his colleague (Mr. Wurts) embraced not only the inquiry, 
whether goods had been illegally removed from the stores of the 
custom-house, but, also, what had been the conduct of the officers 
who had those goods in charge. If it should be ascertained that 
these goods had been illegally removed, then the case would 
present an aspect in which the information asked by the amend- 
ment might become very important. There was a striking differ- 
ence between negligence and intentional guilt. If it should 
eventually appear that the losses sustained by the Government pro- 
ceeded from the illegal conduct of the Collector, which, however, 
he did not believe to be the case : then it would be highly important 
to know what had been his conduct immediately after the dis- 
covery and disclosure of the transaction. If every exertion upon 
his part had been promptly made to protect the public interest 
and repair the injury which had been done, it was a circumstance 
which ought to go far in redeeming his character from the impu- 
tation of an intentional violation of the law, and was a fact which, 
in justice, should be made known. Mr. B. said, he concurred in 
the sentiments expressed by his friend from Delaware, except in 
the opinion that the object proposed by the amendment ought to 
be a distinct subject of inquiry. He thought it was one entire 
transaction, and that justice to the parties concerned required 
that the whole information should come together from the Depart- 
ment. 



' Register of Debates, 19 Cong, i Sess. 1825-1826, II., part i, p. 860. 
10 



146 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

1826. 
REMARKS, JANUARY 5, 1826, 

ON THE JUDICIARY SYSTEM. i 

Mr. Buchanan observed, that he could not concur in senti- 
ment with the gentleman from Virginia. The provision which 
allowed the Judges themselves to fix upon their own allotment 
among the several districts in the United States, still existed. 
That provision had continued in existence till now, without any 
inconvenience, that he had ever heard of, having been sustained in 
consequence of it. Was it not a proper arrangement? Could 
any argument of force be alleged against it? Who is it that is 
appointed a Judge of the Supreme Court of the United States? 
The President makes a selection of these officers over the whole 
Union. He seeks for men in whom natural intellect has been 
matured by study and experience; who possess firmness, energy, 
and weight of character — men eminent in their profession and 
learned in the law. Men, in whom these requisites unite, may 
not always be found in every section of the Union, and the inten- 
tion of the law is, that, after they shall have been selected, wher- 
ever they may chance to be, they shall be brought together, and 
shall then distribute themselves through the various districts of the 
Union, in such manner as shall best consult their own personal 
convenience, and the interests of the country at large. Such had 
been the practice through an unbroken series of years, and to say 
now, that particular individuals shall be fixed to this or that par- 
ticular Circuit, would be to interfere with a Judicial right. If 
one of the Judges shall die, or shall resign his office, a new allot- 
ment is necessary, and this gives opportunity for the President to 
make a choice wherever he shall see fit, and then the new Judge 
falls into the general arrangement, and is allotted as best suits the 
convenience of all parties. Is there, said Mr. B. any danger 
here — is there any formidable cause of alarm — is it likely, Mr. 
Chairman, that the three new Judges will be able to control and 
overrule the seven old ones? Is there the remotest probability, 
that any one of the Atlantic Judges will, by such an influence, 
be removed against his will across the Alleghany Mountains? 
The power of choosing their own Circuits has been vested in these 
Judges since the foundation of the Government, and an attempt, 



' Register of Debates, 19 Cong, i Sess. 1825-1826, II., part i, p. 887. 



1826] SPEECH ON JUDICIARY SYSTEM 147 

by this amendment, to incorporate into the law a new system, 
would be likely, instead of being beneficial, to prove highly in- 
jurious. The Committee on the Judiciary, in presenting the bill 
in its present form, had been influenced by a wish to permit the 
subject to come fairly and simply before the House. In that 
simple fomi he hoped that the principles of this measure would 
receive their discussion, and that the subject would not be em- 
barrassed by adding to the bill any new provisions at present. Let 
the gentleman's measure be argued as a general measure, and then 
let it stand or fall on its ow^n merits. 



SPEECH, JANUARY 9 AND 10, 1826, 

ON THE JUDICIARY SYSTEM.' 

Mr. Buchanan said that he should make no apology for 
troubling the committee at this time; his situation as a member 
of the Committee on the Judiciary, rendered it his duty to occupy 
their attention. The able speech of the gentleman from Virginia 
required an answer : for that gentleman had brought forward 
nearly every thing wdiich could be urged with any sort of weight 
against the measure proposed in the bill. He should endeavor to 
follow the course of his arguments in such a reply as he might 
be able to offer. In doing so, he would first be under the neces- 
sity of directing the attention of the committee, for a short time, 
to a part of the judicial history of this country. In the year 1802, 
Congress had this subject before them, (he would not carry the 
committee to a period further back) and, at that time, the present 
Judicial system had been established. The entire territory of 
the United States w-as then divided into six circuits. A Circuit 
Judge was assigned to each of them, and these six Circuit Judges 
constituted the Supreme Court of the United States. The ques- 
tion to be determined at that time, was between what was called 
the Circuit Court System, and that which was adopted, and 
which at present prevails. The respective merits of the two 
systems were fully compared, and the question of preference de- 
liberately settled — nor has a whisper of disapprobation, for many 
years past, been heard against the result. The plan adopted has 
received the seal of experience ; a vast number of important con- 
troversies have been submitted to the adjudication of the tribunal 



' Register of Debates, 19 Cong, i Sess. 1825-1826, II., part i, pp. 916-925. 
927-929, 930-932. 



148 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

then established; and the principles involved have been decided 
in a manner which has secured to the Court the entire confidence 
of this whole People. 

The next event worthy of notice which occurred in our 
judicial history, was in 1807, when Congress again had the sub- 
ject before them. The question then was, whether they should 
depart from the system adopted in 1802, or should extend it, in 
its existing form, to the increased wants and exigencies of the 
country. The result was, the passing of an act, by which a 
seventh Judge of the Supreme Court was added to the six already 
on the bench, and a circuit was assigned to him, consisting of 
Tennessee, Kentucky, and Ohio. 

I was therefore greatly astonished to hear from the gentle- 
man from Virginia, that the principles contained in this bill were 
new. So far have the committee been from recommending any 
new project, that, on the contrary, they have but proposed to 
extend to other portions of the Union, the benefits of a system, 
the wisdom of which has been already tested by the experience 
of all the Atlantic States. In 1802, Ohio was only a Territory — 
but in 1807, she had become a respectable State, and Kentucky 
and Tennessee were then fast rising into importance. Congress 
therefore, resolved, at the latter period, to extend to these im- 
portant members of the Confederacy, the benefits already enjoyed 
by their sister States. In consequence of this determination, the 
Judge who has been so highly, and so deservedly eulogized in the 
speech of the gentleman from Virginia, was put upon the bench. 
This system has continued without alteration, addition, or com- 
plaint, for a period of eighteen years: and the question for the 
committee now to decide is, whether the country shall go on in 
this prosperous and happy judicial course, extending the present 
well-tried system to meet the wants of the People, or whether we 
shall commence a career of new and untried and hazarded experi- 
ments. 

The first inquiry to be answered is, Does the judicial situ- 
ation of the United States require the change? 

And, on this point, the gentleman undertook the Herculean 
task. He attempted to prove, that the present bill is not required 
by the necessities of the country. The argument of the gentle- 
man, has, however, in this particular, contradicted itself: for, 
although he set out with declaring, and adducing arguments to 
prove, that so cuml^rous a machinery as three additional Judges 
was not necessary, he concluded his speech by pledging himself 



1826] SPEECH ON JUDICIARY SYSTEM 149 

that he should offer as a substitute, if the committee would consent 
to strike out the first section of the bill, the establishment of ten 
circuits, and the appointment of ten nem Judges. If, as the 
gentleman endeavored to persuade us, the present organization 
of the system is adequate to supply the wants of the country, how 
can he reconcile it to himself to offer such a proposition as he has 
bound himself to do, in case his motion should prevail? Surely 
the gentleman cannot wish to establish so many sinecures. 

But, Mr. Chairman, it is not a fact that the present number 
of Circuit Courts is adequate to the wants of this nation. The 
complaints of the whole Western Country are spread before you. 
The citizens of that part of the Union are clamorous for some 
change, or some extension of the system; and, in my opinion, 
they have the justest reason for urging their demands. Sir, the 
administration of justice, as has been justly observed in the course 
of this debate, goes home to the bosom of every society. The 
wisest and most wholesome laws are passed in vain, unless they 
are so administered, and executed, as to carry the benefits they 
contain to the People for whom they are provided. 

Your statute book may be loaded with wise and judicious 
regulations; but if, from a defect in the organization of the 
judicial system, they never reach the great body of the People, 
they are but as a sounding brass and tinkling cymbal. The office 
of Judge is one of the greatest dignity, and of the greatest 
importance to the country. The Judge has it in his power to do 
more good or evil than any other officer of your Government, 
because he, and he alone, is to carry those laws into effect, which 
directly bear upon the interests of the great body of People. 
With reference to these considerations, Mr. B. undertook to prove, 
not only that the Committee on the Judiciary were justifiable in 
reporting this bill, but that they would have neglected the most 
solemn obligations of duty had they neglected to do it. 

What, Mr. B. asked, was now the situation of that portion 
of the country, included within the Seventh Judicial District — 
the States of Tennessee, Kentucky, and Ohio? In the year 1807, 
Congress extended to them the benefits of the Circuit Court sys- 
tem ; and what had since then occurred ? Look at the position and 
extent of those States, on the map, said Mr. B., and consider that 
the Judge of that Circuit Court has to travel over them, and hold 
Courts in each of them twice in each year, and that, in addition to 
the performance of all these important and laborious duties, he is 
obliged to attend, annually, the session of the Supreme Court in 



150 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

this city. A man must be more than mortal who could perform 
all these duties. Suppose it were in his power, for a time, to 
dispatch all this judicial business, yet, unless his constitution were 
equal to that of Hercules, the labor to which he would be exposed, 
must, in a short time, destroy him. Such was, in fact, the case, 
with the respectable Judge of whom the gentleman from Virginia 
had spoken in terms of such high and just eulogium. Is not 
that Judge, at this moment, stretched on his sick bed, in conse- 
quence of his attention to the discharge of his judicial functions? 
Has he not experienced that the labor you impose upon him is 
unmerciful, and such as you ought not to impose upon any Judge 
in this country? Mr. B. asked of the gentleman from Virginia 
to consult his feelings, and say whether this faithful and valuable 
public servant should literally be killed by the imposition upon 
him of duties which it was impossible for any human constitution 
to perform ? Although this was a strong argument, appealing to 
the feelings of members in favor of the bill, because we ought not 
to act toward others as we would not to ourselves, yet, said 
Mr. B., let us look at it in another point of view. 

Is justice, then, administered according to law, in the three 
States referred to? For, Mr. B. said, he spoke of them now, 
particularly as the gentleman from Virginia had particularly 
directed the attention of the committee to them. He held in his 
hand, he said, the memorial from the bar of Nashville, signed by 
G. W. Campbell, as Chairman, and Felix Grundy, as Secretary; 
gentlemen whose standing was well known to this House and 
to the country. The memorial detailed such facts in relation to 
causes depending in the Federal Court in that part of the country, 
that, so far from being astonished at what have been called the 
clamors of the West on this subject, Mr. B. said that he was 
astonished that their clamors had not been more loud, and oftener 
reiterated on this floor. In addition to the facts which have 
already l)een stated relative to this part of the subject by the 
Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, the memorial declares, that 
" the Seventh Circuit, consisting of Kentucky. Ohio, and Tennes- 
see, is too large for the duties of it to be devolved on one man " ; 
and it was absolutely impossible for the Judge assigned to this 
circuit, to fulfill the letter of the law, designating his duties. 
Such has been the delay of justice in the State of Tennessee, that 
some of the important causes now pending in their Circuit Courts, 
are older than the professional career of almost every man at the 
bar. 



1826] SPEECH ON JUDICIARY SYSTEM 151 

What answer can the Committee make to this memorial? 
These men, whose interest and indination it was to have the 
business before the Court determined, have come forward, and 
pledged their veracity for the truth of such facts, as, if believed 
by the Committee, will conclusively prove that the delay of 
justice has become so great as to amount to its denial. Was not 
such a state of things a mere mockery of justice? Was it not 
holding up a delusion to the People of that State, disappointing 
them of the reality? Was it not the greatest injury, he asked, 
that could possibly occur in a new country, to have its land titles 
held in suspense for so many years? If this memorial is to be 
credited, it puts the question at rest, as to the necessity of a new- 
organization of the present system, as regards the State of Ten- 
nessee. 

And how was the fact in the State of Kentucky, another 
District in the same Circuit? The Chairman of the Judiciary 
Committee had stated that, in that Circuit, two thousand causes 
had been disposed of within the last three years — of which state- 
ment the gentleman from Virginia had made a very ingenious use. 
But the gentleman from Massachusetts, at the head of that Com- 
mittee, had not stated that the two thousand causes had been 
tried and determined in that Court. Mr. B. appealed to any law- 
yer, in this House, or to any gentleman experienced in the busi- 
ness of Courts, whether it was not the fact that nine-tenths of all 
the cases depending in Courts never require a trial, being cases 
involving no question either of law or of fact. A very large 
portion of the two thousand causes decided in the Kentucky dis- 
trict were of that description. Of what description were the 
causes which remained on the docket of that Court? A great 
part of them those which were for trial, such as the Court have 
not been able to hear and decide. The causes depending at this 
time in the State of Kentucky, are between nine hundred and 
one thousand. If there were a State in the Union in which it 
was important that the judicial business should be promptly and 
certainly transacted, it was that State. With regard to the Dis- 
trict of Ohio, Mr. B. said, he had also in his hand a memorial 
from the Bar of that State, on the same subject and to the same 
general effect as the representations from Tennessee and Ken- 
tucky. He would not detain the House to read it; but any 
gentleman might do so who chose, and he would see what was 
the situation of that State in respect to the administration of 
justice, under the laws of the United States. 



152 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

Let us, then, said Mr. B. inquire what are the evils which 
arise, under the present system, from the delay of justice. 

The Constitution of the United States has limited the powers 
of the Federal Judiciary : that instrument has declared that the 
Courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction of causes 
arising between citizens of different States. The act of Congress 
has further limited this power, and declares that the Federal 
Courts shall have no jurisdiction in any such case, unless the 
defendant live within the bounds of the State in which suit is 
brought. And for what purpose have the constitution and the 
law given this authority to Courts of the United States ? That a 
citizen of one State might enjoy the same privileges as the 
citizens of any other States. The framers of the Constitution 
foresaw, that, from local causes, jealousies might spring up in the 
different States against the demands or the titles of foreigners 
and citizens of other States. Whilst, therefore, they left the citi- 
zens of the same State to settle their controversies before their 
own Courts, they have wisely provided tribunals, to be called into 
existence by the authority of the Federal Government, to settle 
those existing between foreigners and citizens. Under the system 
now in operation, the citizens of the State in which the suit is 
instituted, are, in almost every instance, the defendants. 

Who are then particularly interested in a reformation or cor- 
rection of the defects in the Judiciary System? Is it the citizens 
of the Western or Southwestern States? Are they to derive 
particular advantages from the prompt determination of causes in 
these Courts ? Certainly not : because no man can, unless in a 
few cases, institute a suit in the Federal Judiciary of any Western 
State, unless he be a citizen of some other State, or an alien. 
For whose benefit, then, would the proposed change in the system 
principally operate? Would it not be for the benefit of the citi- 
zens of other States than those in which the administration of 
justice, under the laws of the United States, is now defective? 
They, and they chiefly, would avail themselves of the advantages 
which a reform of the system would afford to suitors: and, of 
course, said Mr. B. by omitting to establish a Federal Judiciary 
competent to execute the laws of the United States in the Western 
States, you do not so much injure those States, as you deprive 
the citizens of other States of their legitimate remedy. Then, 
sir, this mighty bugbear which the gentleman has raised up to 
your view, when tested by the principles of reason, vanishes into 
thin air. 



1826] SPEECH ON JUDICIARY SYSTEM 153 

What was now the situation of a man bringing a suit in the 
Circuit Court for the District of Kentucky? Suppose a suit to 
be brought in that Court by a merchant of Philadelphia against 
a citizen of Kentucky. The greatest temptation was held out to 
the defendant, to set up an unjust and a fraudulent defence; be- 
cause, from the situation of business in that Court, the case could 
not, perhaps for years, be brought to trial. So that the benefits to 
arise from the proposed amendment of the judiciary system, 
would go chiefly to citizens of other States than those in which 
the change in the system would take effect. 

So much, Mr. B. said, for the wants of Tennessee, Ohio, and 
Kentucky. How was it with regard to other portions of the 
Union? What was the situation of Louisiana, including New 
Orleans, the emporium of the West ? The commercial intercourse 
of that City with the rest of the Union and with foreign nations 
gives rise to causes of great variety and importance. In that 
portion of the country, there is but a District Judge, with no 
Judge of the Supreme Court to assist and enlighten his judgment, 
or to bring to the Supreme Court the requisite knowledge of the 
laws and practice of the Courts of that State. There was a 
peculiar reason, imperatively requiring that there should be a 
Supreme Court Judge to hold a Circuit Court in that part of the 
country ; which was, that the civil law regulates the proceedings in 
the Courts of that State — a law, different in its origin and prin- 
ciples from the common law, which prevails throughout the other 
States of the Union. Mr. B. considered it beyond all controversy 
settled, from these facts, that there was an absolute necessity for 
the adoption of some legislative measure to remedy the evils 
growing out of the defective system now established. 

I now come, said Mr. B. to what I believe to be the great 
point of the speech of the gentleman from Virginia— one which 
demands, and certainly will receive, the deliberate attention of 
the members of this Committee. He is apprehensive that, by 
means of this bill, the Supreme Court is to become a political 
tribunal, for the purpose of propagating opinions now peculiar to 
the West, and of overruling determinations already made by the 
Supreme Court, and of changing the system of constitutional 
law as it has been established by that Court. If, sir, I could 
believe, for a moment, that such is the intention, or would be the 
consequence, of this measure, I would be one of the last men in 
the United States to support it. If I were to believe that that 
firm and beautiful fabric, which the Supreme Court has already 



154 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

erected, would be seized by rude hands, and prostrated in conse- 
quence of the passage of this bill, I would myself, at once, enter 
my solemn protest against it. But I think the committee will 
perceive that the apprehensions of the gentleman were the vision- 
ary phantoms of his own imagination, having no existence in 
reality. If such were the intention or expectation of the People 
of the Western States, in seeking this amendment of the system, 
it had eluded the vigilance of the Committee on the Judiciary. 
That Committee had never dreamt of such a project. Sir, said 
Mr. B. I consider the integrity and independence of the Judiciary 
as the Palladium of our political system, and that, if we should 
ever be deprived of it, either by fraud or by force, it would be a 
vital stab to our political institutions. Therefore, Mr. B. said, if 
he did not make it as plain as light that the gentleman's apprehen- 
sions on this score were ideal and visionary, he would not for a 
moment ask the favor of the committee for this bill. 

Suppose, for the sake of argument, what no one could believe, 
that it was the intention of all the West to overturn the settled 
decisions of the Supreme Court, and that three additional Judges 
were to be brought upon the Bench, in pursuance of that deter- 
mination. There are now seven Judges on the Bench of that 
Court. Does the gentleman seriously believe, said Mr. B. that 
the three Judges to be appointed will be able to overcome the firm- 
ness, the inflexibility, and the learning, of the other seven ? He 
must first shew that the new Judges would have the disposition, 
and then that they would have the power, to rejudge the cases 
determined by the Supreme Court, before he can establish his 
argument of danger from that quarter. The danger does not exist 
in fact: the shadow is conjured up merely to deter the House 
from passing a bill, the expediency of which is unquestionable. 

But the gentleman had also introduced into the discussion of 
this bill, what was w^holly irrelevant matter. He had connected 
with it the subject introduced by a gentleman from Kentucky, 
requiring a certain number of the Judges of the Court to unite 
in deciding particular cases, on which proposition, whenever it 
came before the House. Mr. B. said he would go heart and hand 
with the gentleman from Virginia. He should be opposed to 
any measure w^hich might be suggested in the form or to the 
effect of that which had been proposed. One ounce of experience, 
Mr. B. said, was worth a pound of theory. The institutions 
under which we have flourished — under which we have grow'n 
from infancy to manhood, ought never to be lightly forsaken or 



1826] SPEECH ON JUDICIARY SYSTEM 155 

abandoned. The perfection of our system is, that, whilst one 
State may fume and rage against the General Government, or 
establish wild positions within its own particular government, the 
other States are cool and at rest. This had been the case within 
the State which he himself had the honor in part to represent. 
The States on every side of her looked on without participating 
in her feelings. The People of Pennsylvania did not long war 
against the Federal Judiciary. They were soon restored to tran- 
quillity, and now were in harmony with the General Government. 
Another State was now in a similar position to that which Penn- 
sylvania had once occupied; and he trusted that the cloud which 
now hangs over her would soon dissipate, and that she would 
come out brighter than ever, and that, in proportion to the 
severity of her present experience, would be the progress of her 
future prosperity. Mr. B. said, that he was never for disturb- 
ing the institutions of the country, or its settled policy, to gratify 
the feelings, however manly they might be, of the People of any 
particular part of the Union. He would let them go on, perfectly 
satisfied himself that, however wrong or excited for a time, they 
might be, the People of every part of this country will always 
come right in the end. No new f angled project, such as that 
which the gentleman from Virginia had combatted, should ever 
have his sanction, so long as he had a seat on this floor. But 
what connection had it with the propositions contained in this 
bill ? None at all. No such principle was to be found in the bill ; 
and, unless it was, the bill ought not to be opposed on account 
of what it did not contain. 

But the gentleman had proceeded upon the principle that the 
three new Judges, to be appointed on the passage of this bill, 
would entertain peculiar notions of the Constitution, the effect of 
which he seemed to deprecate. Is there, said Mr. B. any danger 
of this kind ? The President of the United States may, if he thinks 
proper, select these Judges from any portion of the Union, other 
than the Western. But what is the probability? There are able 
men scattered over all the Western States, abundantly capable of 
doing honor to the bench of the Supreme Court. How, then, will 
the selections of new Judges be probably made? Partly from 
one portion of the country, and partly from the other, within 
which the new Courts will' be established. Kentucky, whom the 
gentleman appears so much to dread, has already her Judge. She 
is a part of the Seventh Circuit, and will continue to have, for her 
portion, the firm, enlightened, and independent Judge, who has. 



1.3G THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

for several years, been arranged to that circuit. Even if Ken- 
tucky, therefore, had the incHnation, which Mr. B. said he did 
not beheve, of prostrating the decisions of the Supreme Court, she 
would not have it in her power. When did Tennessee, Ohio, 
Indiana, Ilhnois, or Missouri, set up any pecuHar constitutional 
notions? or Louisiana? Whoever heard of Alabama, of Missis- 
sippi, contending with the Courts of the United States for occupy- 
ing claimant or replevin laws ? The presumption, therefore, was, 
that the three new Judges, to be selected from those Western 
States, would not be infected, as the gentleman supposed, with 
strange doctrines, but would move on as harmoniously and inde- 
pendently as the members who, at present, compose the Supreme 
Court. Kentucky, at least, of whom the gentleman from Virginia 
had so many fears, was supplied with a Judge, whose judicial 
life had been opposed to her peculiar notions. The probability 
was, that, in the selection of the new Judges, not a single one 
would be taken, possessing the same opinions and notions which 
tlie gentleman had attributed to the State of Kentucky. He 
asked, then, where was the danger that, after the passage of this 
bill, the Supreme Court would become a political tribunal ? I do 
not pretend, said Mr. B. to have more confidence than I ought 
to have in this or any other administration. I am not disposed to 
bestow on the Executive of the country more confidence than the 
institutions of the country requires; but I have not the least 
apprehension that this Executive, or any other, would be so far 
forgetful of his duty, as to throw a firebrand into the Supreme 
Court, and create a faction there. He was of opinion, upon the 
whole, that the gentleman had entirely failed in the attempt to 
show there was the least danger that the Supreme Court, organ- 
ized as proposed by this bill, would become a political Court. 

Another objection which the gentleman from Virginia made 
— and, Mr. B. said, he must compliment his speech by saying, 
that he really appeared to have introduced into it every thing 
which could be an objection to this bill — was, that Courts of 
Appeal, in all the States except one, consist of a number of Judges 
not exceeding five; and, from this practice, he had drawn an 
argument, that nine or ten Judges would be too many to compose 
the Supreme Court of the United States. In the first place, Mr. 
B. said, he denied the fact; and, in the next place, admitting the 
fact, he denied that there was any weight in the argument. The 
Judges of the Supreme Court of the States, are selected from the 
mass of the Bar of each State: They are generally men who 



1826] SPEECH ON JUDICIARY SYSTEM 157 

have grown grey in practice, and who have been aU their hves ac- 
customed to the pecuhar laws of that State. They come upon the 
Bench, bringing with them all the knowledge necessary to cast 
judicial light on the subjects they may have to touch. 

How are the Judges of the United States chosen? They 
are selected from an extent of country embracing four and twenty 
distinct and independent systems of law. The common law, to 
be sure, is the root of nearly all of them ; but, for a long period of 
years, each State has gradually been establishing a local policy 
and a local system of laws, peculiarly adapted to its situation 
and the habits and morals of its People. Does it follow, then, 
because five Judges are a sufficient number to constitute the 
Supreme Court of any one State of the Union, that a Supreme 
Court for the whole Union, embracing these twenty-four distinct 
systems of laws, can be properly constituted of five Judges ? If 
five Judges are not too many for a Supreme Court of a State, 
it is a convincing argument that nine or ten are not more than 
sufficient for the Supreme Court of the Union. 

Another consideration ought also to be taken into view. The 
systems of law of many of the different States, are radically 
variant; and a man who had practiced all his life in Maine, 
going to Louisiana, would find himself wholly unacquainted with 
the practice in that State. So far from strengthening his case, 
Mr. B. therefore thought that this argument of the gentleman 
from Virginia was wholly against him. 

But, Mr. B. further said, he denied the facts assumed by the 
gentleman, both as to England and to this country. Is not the 
Supreme Court of New York composed of the Senate of the 

State? 

(Mr. Mercer explained. He meant a court composed of 
judges, not of Senators. He knew, also, that the House of Lords 
was the appellate court in England.) 

Mr. Buchanan thanked him for the hint. He said, the 
House of Peers in England is an appellate Court nominally, and 
only nominally. Whenever a writ of error of the least conse- 
quence is before them, the twelve judges are summoned to give 
their attendance ; and the twelve judges are thus, in England, m 
fact, the Court of Appeals. In my recollection, there never has 
been a case in England, in which the House of Lords has decided 
in opposition to the opinion of the judges. 

In England, there is also the Court of Exchequer Chambers, 
consisting of the twelve judges, and nothing is more common 



158 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

in that country than, when the judges find a case before them 
is difficult, to adjourn it to the Exchequer Chamber previous to 
its being decided from the bench. So that, in England, the 
Court of Errors, in the last resort, consists, virtually, of twelve 
judges. One thing, Mr. B. was willing to admit, that, if the 
Supreme Court w-ere not to be composed of Circuit Court Judges, 
the number often would be too great. The perfection of a 
judicial system is this: that each judge shall, in the discharge of 
his duties, feel the weight of personal responsibility resting upon 
his shoulders. He agreed that, in a crowded court, men who 
want talents or application are in danger of becoming mere aye 
and no men, voting with the minority or majority; and there 
would be the additional danger, in that case, that the Executive, 
from personal preference, might place on the bench men of sub- 
ordinate qualifications, supposing that they might be lost sight of 
among the number. The great advantage of our system and of 
the English system is, that the Judges of their Superior Courts 
and of ours are compelled to try causes on the Circuit. The 
judiciary of England, like ours, stands thus on high ground. In 
cases of civil rights, there is no country in the world in which 
they are better protected than in England. 

Nor was the gentleman correct in the distinction which he 
had drawn between the Nisi Prius Courts of England and the 
Circuit Courts of the United States — in drawing which he had 
mistaken what had fallen on that point from the Chairman 
of the Judiciary Committee. Most of the important cases decided 
by the Superior Courts in England. Mr. B. said, are first decided 
in the Courts of Nisi Prius, w'here the principle of law is first 
argued. He believed this, from knowing a large portion of the 
most valuable reports of the cases published in England are of 
proceedings at Nisi Prius — precisely as in the Circuit Courts of 
the United States. The most striking difference is one more of 
form than of substance. The Circuit Courts under our system 
render a final judgment, but in England this is rendered by the 
Court in Bank, from which the Judge of Nisi Prius proceeds. 

Each Judge of the Supreme Court of the United States has 
highly responsible and important duties to perform throughout 
his circuit. The eyes of the world are upon him, in a court 
in which he must, from his station, act the principal part. He 
is closely scanned by the members of the Profession, who, of all 
men, are best calculated to decide upon the abilities of a Judge. 
The standard by which they decide upon his merits, is of the 



1826] SPEECH ON JUDICIARY SYSTEM 159 

highest character ; because it is expected, from his elevated station, 
that he shall possess great talents and unbending integrity, and a 
perfect knowledge of the laws of his country. This situation, and 
the duties attendant u^xdu it, is an ample security both against the 
appointment of incompetent judges — and against indolent habits 
after they are appointed, which might otherwise result from the 
number of members of the Court. 

Let us now, Mr. Chairman, said Mr. Buchanan, take a view 
of the comparative merits of the two systems proposed for our 
adoption. The system proposed by the gentleman from Virginia, 
will call into existence ten new judges, and will place them on 
the benches of the Circuit Courts, to perform the same duties 
which are now devolved upon the judges of the Supreme Court. 
It contemplates that the judges of the Court shall continue as they 
are for the present ; but shall be eventually reduced to the number 
of five, and their jurisdiction be exclusively appellate. 

Why, sir, should this important change be made, when it is 
manifest that the addition of two or three judges to the Supreme 
Court will be abundantly sufficient to supply the judicial wants of 
the country? No complaints have ever reached my ear that 
justice has been improperly delayed in the Circuits East of the 
Alleghany mountains. On the contrary, we have the best reason 
for believing, that the Courts answ^er every purpose intended by 
the Constitution and the laws. Indeed some of the circuits might 
be enlarged if it were necessary. For example, the fourth cir- 
cuit consists of the States of Maryland and Delaware only, and 
the Judge resides within a very short distance of the Capitol. 
Why, then, should a system be adopted, neither called for by the 
wants nor the wishes of the People of the Eastern portion of the 
Union, merely because the present system is inadequate to do 
justice to the People of the West? Sir. said Mr. B. if it were 
necessary for the prompt and efficient administration of justice to 
incur the expense of supporting ten new Judges, I would not 
hesitate one moment in voting for the proposition; but, when 
there is not the least occasion for such a measure, its adoption 
would be a most unjustifiable squandering of the public treasure. 
It would be creating sinecures in the six Eastern circuits, and 
would leave both the Judges of the Supreme Court and the Circuit 
Judges without sufficient employment. This would be directly 
contrary both to the institutions and the habits of this country. 

The gentleman from Virginia has argued that some of the 
present Judges of the Supreme Court are now becoming old ; that 



ICO THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

they will soon not be able to endure the fatigue of riding their 
circuits, and that they will thus be compelled to resign. Mr. B. 
said, there was no man in the country who felt more respect, nay, 
more veneration for the Judges of that Court, than he did him- 
self. He trusted, therefore, no person within the sound of his 
voice, would for one moment suppose, that the declaration he was 
about to make had been dictated by any want of a proper regard 
for the Judges who composed that tribunal. He was, however, 
firmly of the opinion, that the result which had been so much 
dreaded by the gentleman, was a strong argument in favor of the 
existing system. 

It is a general law of nature, that, when age prostrates the 
vigor of the body, the mind loses its power and its energy in 
the same proportion. As a general rule, the Judge who becomes 
physically incapable of travelling over his circuit, will not be 
competent to discharge the high intellectual duties imposed upon 
him by his station. There are, without doubt, many exceptions 
to this rule; but Legislatures, in framing a general system for 
the benefit of society, must be governed by the rule and not by 
the exception. If the tendency of this system, then, shall be, to 
drive Judges from the Bench, who have ceased to be able to per- 
form their duties to the country, it will be a fortunate result. 

Mr. B. said, he had always been of opinion there was much 
wisdom in that constitutional provision of the State of New 
York, which prevented Judges from holding their seats after a 
certain age. It is probable it extends too far ; but if, occasionally, 
it should deprive the People of the services of men who would still 
be useful, in many more instances it will preserve the country 
from suffering all the evils which flow from the administration of 
justice by an incompetent and a superannuated Judge. 

The gentleman from Virginia, in reply to the argument of 
the Chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, has stated 
that he admitted it might become necessary, in twenty years, to 
establish a Circuit Court system, independent of the Judges of 
the Supreme Court; and, from this admission, has deduced an 
argument that it is proper to establish it at present. Sir, said 
Mr. B. I cannot feel the force, though I may acknowledge the 
ingenuity of this mode of reasoning. A statesman, looking for- 
ward to the future destinies of his country, and anticipating the 
time wlien its population may be doubled ; when its foreign and 
domestic commerce may be vastly extended ; and when a greatly 
increased intercourse among the People of the different States 



1826] SPEECH ON JUDICIARY SYSTEM 161 

shall give birth to many new subjects of litigation, predicts that it 
may then become necessary to establish the judicial system recom- 
mended by the gentleman from Virginia; that gentleman takes 
advantage of this declaration, and asks, because it may become 
necessary then, that we shall establish it now. This is not the 
manner in which our predecessors have acted. They provided 
for the wants of the People as they arose. The gentleman from 
Virginia, however, would wish us to reverse the rule, and provide 
now for a state of things which may not exist for half a century. 

In my own opinion, said Mr. B., the time will come when 
the Judges of the Supreme Court shall not be able to perform 
both their appellate and Circuit Court duties : necessity will then 
compel their separation. The day, however, I trust, is far distant. 
I am willing to delay that event as long as possible — not to antici- 
pate its arrival. Let posterity provide for themselves. 

[When Mr. B. had proceeded this far in his observations, 
the hour being late, Mr. Webster asking Mr. B. to give way for 
the purpose, moved that the Committee rise for to-day.] 

The Committee rose, reported progress, and obtained leave to 
sit again ; and 

The House adjourned. 

[Jan. ic] Mr. Buchanan again took the floor. Before he 
resumed the train of observations interrupted by the adjournment 
of yesterday, he said it would be necessary for him to advert to a 
few palpable and prominent mistakes in points of fact, which 
had been made by the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Mercer,) in 
his speech on this subject. He was not aware that they existed 
to the extent in which they do, until he had an opportunity, last 
evening, of reading the printed report of his speech. It was 
necessary to advert particularly to them, lest certain facts, being 
taken for granted, arguments might have weight which were 
founded on them. 

In the first place then, said Mr. B., the gentleman from 
Virginia laid the foundation of one of his arguments, on this 
fact : that, in East Tennessee, there is no Circuit Court established 
by law. This is not the case, sir. There is a Circuit Court 
established by law in East Tennessee, though certainly the present 
organization of the Judiciary renders that Court unable to do 
justice to its suitors. 

[Mr. Mercer said, in explanation, that, for every purpose of 
his argument, the fact which he had stated was not affected by 
the gentleman's correction. He had been informed, by a gentle- 

11 



1G2 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

man whom he supposed to be famiHar with the fact, that the court 
of East Tennessee was a District Court. He had so understood 
on further inquiry, at the Clerk's office. Having understood, 
moreover, that the Judge of that circuit had never attended that 
Court, he had not thought it necessary to examine the law on that 
subject, but took for granted the correctness of what he had 
heard. Having, however, furnished many other cases of District 
Courts on both sides of the Alleghany, to support his argument, 
he did not know, that the mistake, into which he had been 
led, was at all material to the argument.] 

Mr,* Buchanan resumed. 

The explanation of the gentleman, (said Mr. B.,) does not 
militate against what I had to say on this point. The fact is, 
that there is a Circuit Court established by law, in East Tennes- 
see. He did not now state it as an argument, but as a matter of 
fact, in regard to which the gentleman was in error. 

Another mistake made by him, was in supposing that there 
could be any appeal to the Supreme Court from the Northern 
District of the State of New York. The law gives no such 
appeal. An appeal lies from the District Court to the Circuit 
Court of the State, and any appeal to the Supreme Court, in 
cases arising within that District, must, therefore, come from the 
Circuit Court. 

The gentleman, again, had stated that the reason of the great 
increase of business in the Circuit Court of the United States, 
for the Kentucky District, was, that the residents of that State 
were in the habit of making nominal assignments of demands, and 
of lands, in that State, to citizens of other States, in order to 
bring the cases within the jurisdiction of the Federal Court, 
which swelled the amount of causes in that Court. It was im- 
possible, Mr. B. said, that this fact could exist. The judicial 
power of the Federal Government, in this branch of it, extends 
only to cases arising between citizens of different States, or 
between citizens and aliens: and, if the law allowed of a nominal 
transfer of title by a citizen of Kentucky, to a citizen of Pennsyl- 
vania, for the mere purpose of bringing his case into the Circuit 
Court, all the barriers established by the Constitution, to separate 
the Federal Judiciary from that of the States, were at once broken 
down and prostrated. On the contrary, the Federal Courts had 
always decided, that a transfer for this purpose, gave to those 
Courts no jurisdiction whatever. The argument of the gentle- 
man, therefore, founded on a mistake as to fact, could not have 
any operation on the minds of the Committee. 



1826] SPEECH ON JUDICIARY SYSTEM 163 

In another part of his printed speech, the gentleman from 
Virginia had declared that there was the same opportunity for an 
appeal to the Supreme Court from a District Court, having circuit 
powers, that there was from a Circuit Court. In this, also, 
said Mr. B., the gentleman has mistaken the fact. In cases 
where a Judge of the Supreme Court sits with a District Judge, 
and there is a division of opinion between the Judges on the 
bench, whether the matter in controversy be great or small, 
whether it be in a civil or criminal case, an appeal lies from that 
Court to the Supreme Court of the United States. But such 
an appeal does not, nor cannot lie from the District Court, 
because no such case can exist. The decision of the District 
Court, having Circuit Court powers, is final, in all cases in which 
the sum in controversy does not exceed two thousand dollars; 
and that is one of the reasons, and the principal reason, why there 
are so few appeals from several of these District Courts. 

In another part of his printed speech, the gentleman from 
Virginia had asked this question : Whoever heard of expediting 
the decisions of a body of men by increasing the number of those 
who were to make the decision ? I answer, nobody. I know of 
no such argument, said Mr. B. as that to which this question 
applies. If such an argument were attributed to the gentleman 
from Massachusetts, to whom the gentleman from Virginia was 
replying, that gentleman certainly never made it. The object 
of the Committee on the Judiciary, in reporting this bill, was not 
to prevent delay in the business of the Supreme Court. On the 
contrary, a different bill had been reported with that view, the 
purpose of which was to make the terms of the Supreme Court 
longer. This bill was not reported to expedite the business of 
the Court of Errors, but its principal object is to carry justice into 
those parts of the country in which it is not now duly admin- 
istered. 

There was a tone running through this printed speech, Mr. 
B. said, which he was sorry to see, and which he did not expect 
from the gentleman from Virginia. If it did not contain attacks 
on the motives of the committee in reporting this bill, he could 
not comprehend the meaning of the language employed. Mr. B. 
here quoted the passages of the speech, in the following words : 
" The object of the bill is not to expedite justice," &c. &c. " The 
alteration of this court is then required for political purposes, and 
no other," &c. &c. 

Is this, said Mr. B. such language as is due from the 
gentleman to the Judiciary Committee? Does he suppose, for a 



104 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

single moment, or if he do. does any other gentleman suppose, 
that the Judiciary Committee, in reporting this bill, was governed 
by the low and grovelling motive of a desire to turn the Supreme 
Court into a political instrument? 

i'f ^- 5|5 ^- >I< ^ ^ ^ H« ^ 

Mr. Buchanan resumed. As he wished to finish his remarks 
as soon as possible, he said he should not again yield the floor for 
the purpose of explanation. When he did so just now, he did ex- 
pect the purpose of the gentleman was to make an explanation and 
not an argument. And now, after all he had said, he felt at a loss 
to determine whether the gentleman meant to deny or not the 
imputation cast by his reported speech, upon the committee. Un- 
derstanding him, however, to disclaim any impeachment of the 
motives of the committee, Mr. B. said he would not trouble him- 
self any further with that part of the case. 

Having thus, said Mr. B., done justice to the committee, 
and to myself as one of that committee, and having pointed out 
some of the matters in which the gentleman from Virginia was 
entirely mistaken, omitting to notice others, the noticing of 
which might be considered an useless consumption of time, I 
proceed to make a few other remarks, which it is necessary for 
me to offer on this important subject. 

Mr. Buchanan said that he would conclude his remarks, by 
presenting two additional views of the subject. What will be the 
probable effect of the system proposed by the gentleman from 
Virginia, (Mr. Mercer) upon the Judges themselves of the Su- 
preme Court? and what will be the effect upon the authority and 
weight of their decisions in the estimation of the People? Sir, 
said Mr. B., there are but few men in existence who would volun- 
tarily, and as a matter of choice, devote themselves to the attain- 
ment of that minute knowledge of the common law. which it is 
indispensable that a judge should possess. Other sciences may 
have their votaries, who will worship at their shrine for their 
own sake. I am inclined to believe this is not often the case as 
it regards the common law. Nothing but a continually operating- 
sense of official or professional duty, can urge men to travel 
through its dry and intricate mazes. 

When, sir, we proceed one step further, it will be admitted 
that the nature of that man's taste must be most extraordinary 
who could relish the study of the twenty-four distinct codes of 
municipal regulations which prevail in the twenty-four States of 



1826] SPEECH ON JUDICIARY SYSTEM 165 

the Union, and patiently travel over the hundred volumes in which 
they are contained. And yet it is necessary that a Judge of the 
Supreme Court should possess this species of knowledge. Estab- 
lish the Circuit Court system, and how will he acquire it ? Would 
the literary leisure which he will enjoy — would any consider- 
able portion of the ten months in each year during which he may 
be without employment, be devoted to the task of travelling over 
this barren waste? I think I may boldly answer, No. His time 
could be so much more agreeably, and, if he were not a judge, so 
much more usefully employed, that he would naturally neglect this 
kind of knowledge. If he even were to devote a portion of time 
to its acquisition, it would answer the purpose but in an imperfect 
degree. The truth is, such knowledge cannot be obtained, and, 
after it has been acquired, it cannot be preserved, except by con- 
stant practice. There are subjects which, when the memory has 
once embraced, it retains forever. It has no such attachments 
for acts of Assembly and acts of Congress, or for their exposi- 
tions. This species of knowledge, under the present system, will 
always be possessed by the Judges of the Supreme Court ; because, 
in the performance of their circuit duties, they are placed in a situ- 
ation in which it is daily expounded to them, and in which they 
are daily compelled to decide questions arising upon it. Change 
this system, make them exclusively judges of an appellate court, 
and impose no other duty upon them except that of delivering a 
few opinions in bank each year, and you render it highly probable 
that their knowledge of the common law will become gradually 
more and more faint, and that they will altogether lose the recol- 
lection of the peculiar local laws of the different States. It is 
the constant Circuit Court employment imposed upon the judges 
of England and the United States, which has rendered them what 
they are. 

What effect would the proposed change produce upon the 
authority and moral influence of the decisions of the Supreme 
Court, in the minds of the People? It is of the utmost importance 
that they should hold the judgments of that tribunal in the highest 
veneration. Next to doing justice, it is important to satisfy the 
People that justice has been done. This confidence on their part, 
in the Judiciary of their country, produces that contentment and 
tranquillity which is the best security against sudden and danger- 
ous political excitements. The Judges of the Supreme Court now 
enjoy this confidence in an eminent degree. But, sir, change the 
constitution of the Court, remove the Judges from the public eye, 



166 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

place them here in the City of Washington, and let them compose 
an appellate tribunal only, and what will be the consequence when 
this tribunal shall be brought into collision with State laws and 
excited State authorities? Is there not great danger that it will 
become odious? The Circuit Judges which you would appoint, 
will naturally occupy the same place in public opinion now held 
by the Judges of the Supreme Court. 

When this distant tribunal shall find it necessary to overrule 
their decisions, in cases of deep public interest, that circumstance 
will necessarily create additional prejudice in the minds both of 
the Circuit Judges and the People, and thus increase the mass of 
discontent. It is, therefore, of the utmost importance that your 
Judges of the Supreme Court shall travel over circuits, that they 
shall personally show themselves to the country in the able and 
honest discharge of their high duties, and that they shall thus 
acquire that public confidence which never fails to follow exalted 
worth when it is brought home to the personal observation of the 
community. The Supreme Court, amidst the storms of faction 
and of opposition, have hitherto pursued a steady and independent 
course. They have now acquired a most extensive popularity 
throughout the country; and, even in those States in which their 
decisions have been most violently opposed, the highest respect 
has been felt for the Judges by whom they were pronounced — 
because they have had an opportunity of knowing personally that 
they were both great and good men. No suspicion has ever arisen 
against their personal or judicial integrity. Would the Supreme 
Court have enjoyed the same good fortune, if the judges had 
been entirely secluded from public observation, and been confined, 
in the discharge of their important duties, to a room in this 
Capitol ? 

The gentleman from Virginia has made the language of the 
gentleman from Massachusetts, on this branch of the subject, 
to mean that which he never intended, and which a fair con- 
struction of it will not warrant: that the Judges should go to 
the circuit for the sake of seeking popularity, and, with this 
view, to ascertain what effect their decisions might have upon 
the People. It was his opinion, and one which he thought could 
not be shaken, that they should perform circuit duties, that thus 
the People might see and know and respect them, and they 
might observe the effect of their decisions on society. That they 
might know, as men of experience, what was their operation on 
the community. Of all human creatures, a popular-hunting 



1826] APPROPRIATIONS FOR FORTIFICATIONS 167 

judge is the most contemptible. His object is generally de- 
feated, because the good sense of the People almost always leads 
them eventually to discover what is his true character. 

The gentleman from Virginia has again and again at- 
tempted to excite our fears by declaring that, if the system 
proposed by the committee were adopted, the Supreme Court 
was in danger of being converted into a political tribunal. Is 
there not much greater danger, if the other side of the question 
should prevail? Would a court, composed of ten judges, scat- 
tered over the surface of this vast country, be more liable to the 
influence of political intrigue, than five judges residing in the 
City of Washington? Is this atmosphere so pure that there 
would be no danger from such a residence? A large portion of 
the People of this country hold a different opinion. They think 
this atmosphere is more tainted than that of any other portion 
of the country. If the Supreme Court should ever become a 
political tribunal, it will not be until the Judges shall be settled 
in Washington, far removed from the People, and within the 
immediate influence of the power and patronage of the Exec- 
utive. 

Mr. B. thanked the committee sincerely for their attention. 
He said the subject was dry and uninteresting in its nature, and 
it therefore must have required the exercise of much patience, on 
their part, to follow him, as they had done, through the remarks 
which he had submitted to them. 



REMARKS, JANUARY 27, 1826, 

ON THE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FORTIFICATIONS.i 

Mr. Buchanan said he should vote in favor of the post- 
ponement, for reasons entirely different from those which had 
been urged by any other gentleman. He would, therefore, take 
leave to state them to the House. Before he did this, however, 
he felt himself bound to notice the remarks which had been 
made by the gentleman from New York, (Mr. Storrs,) upon the 
observations which had been made by his colleague, (Mr. Steven- 
son.) 

The gentleman from New York, (Mr. Storrs,) thinks it 
wonderful that my colleague should ask for more time to make 
himself acquainted with the subject. Sir, said Mr. B., I would 

^Register of Debates, 19 Cong, i Sess. 1825-1826, II., part i, p. 1184. 



168 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

ask how new members could have obtained information? Must 
it not have been by intuition? It was impossible that they 
should have procured it in any other manner. The Chairman of 
the Committee of Ways and Means has informed us this day that 
the system of fortifications, about which we have heard so much, 
and which we are now called upon to carry into execution, was 
never published, but remains filed among the private archives 
of this House. Did the new members know this fact? Cer- 
tainly not. How then were they to obtain the information? 

[Mr. M'Lane here explained, and stated, he had said that 
only so much of the plan as it was deemed politic to conceal 
was among the private papers of the House.] 

Mr. B. said, that he had understood the gentleman per- 
fectly. That part of the plan which was all important ; which 
it was deemed necessary to conceal from foreign nations, lest 
they might take advantage of the information which it imparted, 
had not only not been exhibited to the new members, but they 
had not, before this day, been informed of its existence. This 
was the case as it regarded himself, as well as most of the old 
members of the House. Sir, said Mr. B., has the gentleman 
from New York, himself (Mr. Storrs) read all the reports 
which have been presented to this House at different periods 
upon tlie subject of fortifications? Is he well acquainted with 
their whole contents? I will venture to hazard the assertion, 
much respect as I feel for his talents and his industry, that I 
can propound to him twenty questions of importance, having 
immediate relation to the fortifications provided for by this bill, 
not one of which he can answ-er. 

Sir, said Mr. B., it is not necessary, judging from the prin- 
ciples advanced by that gentleman, that he should be acquainted 
with the subject, concerning which he has been called upon to 
act. He has introduced a ne\v and dangerous doctrine into this 
discussion, which I trust and hope never will prevail. Confi- 
dence in an Executive Department was, with him, to take the 
place of knowledge. And why? Because, forsooth, we are 
not Engineers; and, therefore, we are incapable of judging. 
The will of the Engineer Department is thus to become the law 
of this House. The principles which the gentleman has advo- 
cated carry him to this fearful extremity. 

[Mr. Storrs explained. He said, that he hoped the gentle- 
man from Pennsylvania would only answer what he had said : 
that he had urged that the House ought not U^ take on itself the 



1826] APPROPRIATIONS FOR FORTIFICATIONS 169 

responsibility of details which belonged to the other Depart- 
ments: that he, for one, would not consent thus to invert the 
responsibility of the Government. As to his own knowledge on 
the subject of location of the forts, and the science of Engineer- 
ing, Mr. S. said, that he had no doubt, and willingly confessed, 
that the gentleman could, indeed, put to him a catechism which 
he could not answer; and he might, perhaps, justly add, that the 
whole House, including the gentleman from Pennsylvania, 
would be apt to answer it about as correctly as he himself could.] 

Mr. B. thanked the gentleman for the compliment to him- 
self. He did not know whether it was sincere or not. He 
would, however, follow the French maxim, and when expres- 
sions were susceptible of two constructions, he would take them 
in the most favorable sense. Now for the argument. Sir, said 
Mr. B., the gentleman in his explanation has, in substance, 
repeated the doctrine I imputed to him. I will state to the 
House what my opinion is upon the subject, and it is very 
different, indeed, from that advanced by the gentleman. We 
should repose a proper degree of confidence in the reports made 
to this House by the Executive Departments, whilst we believe 
them to be worthy of confidence. It is our duty, however, to 
examine and to consider their representations; to rejudge their 
judgment; and to decide upon their recommendations, justly 
and impartially. We must, in every matter of legislation, act 
upon our own responsibility. We cannot release ourselves from 
it, and impose it upon the Department, as the gentleman has con- 
tended. I think, therefore, that my colleague has given no 
just occasion for the remarks which the gentleman had thought 
proper to make. 

Mr. B. said, he felt friendly to the erection of fortifications. 
He was not willing that we should retrace our steps ; but thought 
we should proceed cautiously and wisely, having a proper regard 
to what our means would justify. In his opinion, his colleague 
(Mr, Stevenson) had erred in comparing the fortifications pro- 
posed to be erected in this country, with those in the interior of 
Europe. It was true, that, in the annals of modern warfare, 
these fortifications had been left behind and disregarded ; and 
Generals had penetrated into the countries whose frontiers had 
been fortified, without fear and without danger. This argu- 
ment, however, did not apply to our fortifications. They are 
intended to be placed upon our coasts, our bays, and at the 
mouths of our large rivers, to afford protection to our great 



170 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

commercial Cities against Naval attacks. Indeed, they may 
become important for the defence of our own Navy. 

Notwithstanding, said Mr. B., that I shall vote for carrying 
into effect a judicious system of fortifications, yet I think there 
is the strongest reason for granting the delay which has been 
asked. In 1822, Congress had this subject before them. The 
Department then asked for five hundred thousand dollars. The 
House got all the information they could obtain : they discussed 
the question fully, and decided that three hundred and seventy 
thousand dollars was sufiicient. They granted this sum; and, 
for the first time, designated the particular objects to which it 
should be applied. They did not then act upon the doctrine of 
confidence which has been recently avowed; but reduced the 
estimate of the Department. In 1823, five hundred thousand 
dollars was granted, and I approved of the measure. I con- 
sidered this sum was then established as the annual appropria- 
tion, in analogy to the appropriation granted for the gradual 
increase of the Navy. Since that time, however, the appropria- 
tions for fortifications have increased in such rapid progression, 
that we are now asked for the sum of seven hundred and ninety- 
five thousand dollars for the present year. In addition to this 
sum, there remained in the Treasury, on the first day of the 
present year, more than one hundred and fifty thousand dollars 
of the appropriations for the last year which had not been 
expended. If you pass this bill, therefore, you will grant nearly 
a million of money to be applied to the erection of fortifications 
during the year 1826. In the short time which has elapsed 
since 1822, you will have nearly trebled your annual appropria- 
tion. I should not now object to five hundred thousand dollars; 
but, before I can vote for a greater sum, I wish to know precisely 
the means of the Treasury for the present year, and compare 
them with the necessary objects of expenditure. We have been 
told, said Mr. B., by the Chairman of the Committee of Ways 
and Means, that there will be sufficient money in the Treasury, 
gradually to pay our debt, between this time and the end of the 
year 1829; and. in the mean time, the sum asked for by the 
present bill, may be applied to fortifications, and all the other 
proper expenditures of the country may be made. 

[Mr. Mcl.ane here observed, that he had not stated the 
whole national debt would be paid in 1829: it was the six per 
cent, debt — the war debt, to which he had referred.] 

Mr. Buchanan said, he did not misunderstand the gentle- 



1826] APPROPRIATIONS FOR FORTIFICATIONS 171 

man from Delaware. He understood him to mean the six per 
cent, war deht, and would have so expressed it, if the gentleman 
had permitted him to proceed. The gentleman had also de- 
clared that, within that period of time, a large portion of the 
debt due to the Bank of the United States might be liquidated. 
Sir, said Mr. B., on this subject I doubt exceedingly. Much 
respect as I feel for the opinion of the Committee of Ways 
and Means, and for that of their Chairman. I must still be 
permitted to doubt, until I see and examine their report. We 
have been told, that report will soon be made to the House. 
We shall then be able to decide what proportion of the public 
money we can, with propriety, apply to fortifications — and what 
to other objects. We should not take so much for one important 
object, as will prevent us from making any appropriations to 
objects of equal importance. The sum which we think it pru- 
dent to withdraw^ from the payment of our debt, should be fairly 
distributed; so as to give a part to all the great objects of 
national interest. 

Mr. B. concluded by saying, it was probable we should 
gain time by the delay of one week ; and that the bill might, in 
that event, be passed as soon, as if it were now urged upon the 
consideration of the House. 



REMARKS, JANUARY 30, 1826, 

ON THE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FORTIFICATIONS.^ 

Mr. Buchanan said, he was very glad the gentleman had 
asked him the question, for he did not like to interrupt gentle- 
men, when speaking, in order to explain. But he thought the 
gentleman had not done him justice entirely, in that and some 
other particulars. I do not mean, said Mr. B. to be drawn 
in as an enemy to fortifications. I never have been, and never 
will be, opposed to the system. My object, on Friday last, was 
to procure a postponement of the bill, and not to defeat it. 
Mr. B. made some observations explanatory of the alleged unex- 
pended balance, and then said, that, with regard to a comparison 
between the Navy and fortifications, he had uttered but one 
sentiment; which w^as, that, in 1823, the appropriation for forti- 
fications had been fixed at five hundred thousand dollars, in 



Register of Debates, 19 Cong, i Sess. 1825-1826, II.. part i, p. 1204. 



172 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

analogy to the annual appropriation of like amount, for the 
increase of the Navy; and that he was not willing to go further 
now, until he had seen the report of the Committee of Ways 
and Means. He had not said that he would not go farther — 
he did not say so yet. Mr. B. concluded by thanking the gentle- 
man for the compliment he had paid him, and could sincerely 
say to the gentleman, in the words of a celebrated author, " Laus 
est a te laudari." 



REMARKS, FEBRUARY 20, 1826, 

ON A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION.' 

Mr. Buchanan offered the following: 

Resolved, That the Constitution should be so amended, as to re-establish 
the third clause of the first section of the second article of the original Consti- 
tution ; except that portion thereof which confers the power of electing the 
President upon the House of Representatives. 

Resolved, That the Constitution should be so amended, that, in case no 
election shall be made by the Electors, then the States shall choose the 
President, from the two highest upon the list, in such manner as the Legisla- 
tures thereof may direct ; each State having one vote. 

Mr. Buchanan said, it was far from his intention to enter 
into any detailed explanation, at this time, of the amendment 
which he had proposed. For the purpose, however, of direct- 
ing the attention of the House to them, he would merely observe, 
that the object of the first resolution was, to restore the origuial 
provision of the Constitution, in regard to the election of Presi- 
dent and Vice-President, to the time when that election would 
devolve upon the House of Representatives. 

The second resolution proposes, that, in that event, the 
sovereign States of this Union shall choose the President from 
the two highest on the list. When no election is made by the 
Electors, it simply confers upon the States themselves the power 
which is now exercised by their Representatives. It proposes 
that, in making the choice, the States, and not their Represen- 
tatives in this House, shall each give one vote, in the manner 
which their respective Legislatures may prescribe. 

Mr. B. said, he did not propose the last amendment because 



' Register of Debates, 19 Cong, i Sess. 1825-1826, II., part i, p. 1417. 
The proposed amendment is also printed in House Report 19, 19 Cong. 
I Sess. 



1826] TO GENERAL JACKSON 173 

he thought it the best possible method of taking the election from 
the House of Representatives; but because, after much reflec- 
tion, he believed it was the only one practicable. That consum- 
mation was devoutly to be wished by all, and by none more than 
the Representatives themselves; and he felt persuaded that no 
amendment for that purpose will ever prevail, which does not 
leave the balance of power among the States, as it at present 
exists. 

Mr. B. said he did not intend to interfere with the debate 
now progressing. In case the House should appoint a Select 
Committee, he wished merely that these propositions may be 
placed in such a situation that they may be referred to that 
committee. ^ 



TO GENERAL JACKSON.' 

^ Washington 8 March 1826. 

Dear General, 

It is with the most sincere & lively pleasure I inform you 

that the convention which met at Harrisburg on the 4th Instant, 

for the purpose of nominating a Governor, after they had 

unanimously recommended the re-election of Governor Shulze, 

adopted the following resolution by a vote of 98 to 7. 

Resolved, That our confidence in the patriotism, talents and inflexible 
integrity of Gen : Andrew Jackson, is unimpaired ; and that his conduct during 
the pendency of, and after, the late election of President of the United States 
is deserving the unqualified approbation of the American people. 

Of the seven members who voted against this resolution, 
there were six, as we are informed by private letters, who 
declared themselves to be your friends ; at the same time stating as 
a justification for their vote that the convention had been assem- 
bled for the purpose of nominating a Governor and for that 
only, and they had no instructions from their constituents to 
proceed farther. This was the fact: — and the only reason why 
you were not formally, as you have been substantially nominated 
as our candidate at the next Presidential election. Jonathan 
Roberts your old friend was the only individual of the seven 
who was really opposed to you. 

I feel proud that my native State has thus early shewn 
herself to the world to be true to her principles and to be beyond 



'Jackson MSS., Library of Congress. 



174 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

the inrtuence of Executive patronage. It had been industriously 
circulated here, that she was wavering and the friends of the 
administration had been or had pretended to be flattered into 
this belief. Their dreams will now vanish. The news from 
Harrisburg produced a strong sensation to day in the House, 
as it was wholly unexpected except by a few of us Pennsyl- 
vanians. 

In addressing you this letter I cannot refrain from intro- 
ducing the name of Molton C. Rogers late Secretary of State 
of Pennsylvania. He has been from the beginning a uniform, a 
decided, a discreet and a most efficient friend of our cause. That 
the cause will triumph over the Union at the next election is 
not only my ardent wish ; but iiiy firm belief. Many of the 
former friends of Mr. Crawford are now decidedly your friends, 
and the remainder are almost universally opposed to the re- 
election of Mr. Adams and have shewn a strong disposition to 
harmonize with us. 

The Senate have not yet disposed of the Panama Mission. 
It is expected they will pass upon it finally during the present 
week. In my opinion from what I learn there will probably be 
a majority in its favor. 

Mr. M'Duffies proposed amendment to the constitution so 
far as it relates to districting the United States will not have a 
large vote in the House of Representatives. I do not think 
it has seventy friends in that body. There will I think be a 
majority — though perhaps not a constitutional one, in favor of 
taking the election from the House, leaving the balance of power 
among the several states to remain in its present condition. God 
send that we should be successful in this important measure. 

Col : Gibson requests me to give his "undiminished love " to 
you. Please to present my kindest and best respects to Mrs. 
Jackson and believe me to be your sincere and devoted friend. 

James Buchanan. 
General Andrew Jackson. 



REMARKS, MARCH 11, 1826, 

ON THE DISMAL SWAMP CANAL.i 

Mr. Buchanan said he had risen to make a few remarks, in 
reply to the arguments of the gentleman from Georgia and the 

' Register of Debates. 19 Cong, i Sess. 1825-1826, II., part i, pp. 1618-1620. 



1826] DISMAL SWAMP CANAL 175 

gentleman from New York. Each of the gentlemen had dis- 
claimed the intention of entering upon the constitutional ques- 
tion; and yet both of them, in the course of their remarks, had 
touched upon it more than once. 

If there be any principle of constitutional law which, at 
this day, should be considered as settled, it is, that Congress 
have the power to aid Internal Improvements, by subscribing for 
stock in companies incorporated by the States. That right is 
the only one proposed to be exercised by the present bill. Gentle- 
men talk about entering the territory of a State, and making 
improvements therein without its consent. Does this bill pro- 
pose that the General Government shall enter the territory of 
any State? that it shall erect any toll gates? that it shall exercise 
any act of sovereignty? or perform any other act by which it 
can possibly come into collision with any State of this Union? 
Not at all. It is a mere proposition to take stock; and if this 
Government cannot do that, what can it do? Suppose, for the 
sake of the argument, (though he feared such a case was not 
very likely to happen) that there should at any time be a surplus 
of money in the Treasury. Must it lie idle, useless to the Gov- 
ernment, and useless to the People? Is it a violation of the Con- 
stitution to invest it? Deplorable, indeed, is our condition, if 
we must stand still and gaze upon our money, and have no power 
to put it into circulation for purposes of public usefulness, by 
becoming the proprietors of stock. I am not, certain, said Mr. 
B., what is called a high constitutional man; but yet I could 
never see how the Constitution could be brought to bear, with 
the least plausibility, against the exercise of this power. We 
have, already, stock to the amount of 7,000,000 dollars in the 
Bank of the United States; and we have subscribed liberally to 
the Delaware and Chesapeake Canal. 

Sir, I will ask the gentleman if he believes it is correct to 
bring the grievances of New York upon this floor? Is it wise — 
is it statesman-like to say, that, because the Government, six or 
seven years ago, was in a state of embarrassment, and unable to 
aid the New York canal, that it is therefore never to aid any 
work of general importance within the limits of any other State? 
Does that gentleman think that New York will never agree to 
help any of her sister States, because this Government was unable 
to help her? Sir, I believe better things of the State of New 
York. I have a high opinion of her magnanimity. I believe 
that she will ever be readv to stretch forth her hand to her 



17G THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

weaker sisters, when the object in view is of a character to 
promote the general prosperity. The gentleman tells us to do 
things like the United States. He would have us to march from 
the Atlantic to the Pacific : to pass, at a bound, over the Rocky 
Mountains, and to undertake some vast system of Internal Im- 
provements which should be worthy of ourselves. The gentle- 
man from Georgia also tells us that he will never agree to become 
a proprietor of stock in this little Dismal Swamp Canal. Let 
him see a splendid system, then he will go for the whole. But, 
Mr. Chairman, I say that, with perhaps one exception, no Gov- 
ernment, in any part of the world, ever did enter upon a general 
system of improvement of any kind, and did not, in the issue, 
lose half its money. This Government has afforded a striking 
example of the truth of my remark. 

I am not for waiting for any such system. The principle 
of self-interest is a sufficient excitement, and a sufficient guar- 
antee, in all such undertakings. Let them be conducted by 
individual enterprise : and when we enter in only as stockholders 
with those who have risked their fortune on the success of the 
work they are conducting, we have the best security that it will 
be well executed, and that our money will not be thrown away, 
unless, indeed, the whole undertaking is to be one great fraud. 
But I trust we are not to be prevented from doing right, by any 
apprehension lest a New York broker should come in, and, by 
some stroke of legerdemain, should get the whole concern into 
his own hands. I hope we are not to be terrified by such spectres 
of the imagination. The gentleman tells us not to exercise a 
doubtful power in an odious manner. An odious manner, sir? 
Rely upon it, such interference as is involved in a subscription 
of stock, instead of being odious, is precisely the most popular 
mode in which the power of the Government can be exercised. 
You come in collision with no State, or State right. You aid 
the State and get its gratitude and good opinion. The gentle- 
man has urged another argument, equally without foundation. 
He would have us to go to work like brokers : we must narrowly 
examine the stock, and see if it will yield six per cent. ; and we 
are to do nothing that an individual would not do, who is 
governed by no motive but that of self-interest. 

But. sir, so long as individuals are certain that they can 
get six per cent, from any stock whatever, be assured we shall 
never be troubled by any solicitations to subscribe. The gentle- 
man seems to forget that Congress should have other objects, 



1826] MR. POINSETT'S NEGOTIATIONS 177 

much higher, much nobler, much wiser, in view than a six per 
cent, calculation. He seems to forget that an object which con- 
duces to the public defence, is one legitimately within the scope 
of our legislation. We are sent here to consult the best interests 
of the Union, the prosperity of its foreign and domestic com- 
merce, and its security against the attacks of an enemy. These 
objects, sir, we shall never effect while we are governed by the 
cent, per cent, notions of the gentleman from New York. This 
bill stands on the same ground as the bill for a subscription of 
stock in the Delaware and Chesapeake Canal, (and the gentle- 
man may rest assured that Company is not insolvent.) I hope, 
sir, that what has been done to aid that great and useful improve- 
ment will not be withheld from the Company created by the 
Legislatures of Virginia and North Carolina, to accomplish an 
object of the same nature. 

The gentleman has made a calculation, for the purpose of 
convincing the Committee that vessels, such as might navigate 
this canal, could not pass along the Sounds, which lie to the 
South of it. on account of their shallowness. Well, sir, and 
because we cannot pass the whole distance to the St. Mary's, 
are we not to subscribe stock; although it is certified to us. by 
the Board of Engineers, that vessels can pass a distance of one 
hundred and sixty-nine miles South of the Canal, in nine feet 
water? The force of this argument may be felt by the gentle- 
man from Georgia, but I confess it is entirely lost upon me. 



REMARKS, MARCH 25, 1826, 

ON MR. POINSETT'S NEGOTIATIONS WITH MEXICO.' 

Mr. Buchanan said, he was glad the gentleman from Ken- 
tucky had brought this subject before the House. Upon read- 
ing the documents which accompanied the President's message, 
on the subject of the Mission to Panama, (said Mr. B.) I con- 
fess I felt alarmed at the declaration of our Minister to Mexico. 
I am well acquainted both with the intelligence and the prudence 
of that gentleman, and, therefore, it is my belief this declaration 
was not made without authority. This belief is strengthened 
by a knowledge of the fact, so far as we can judge from the 
documents, that the Secretarv of State has never disavowed, or 



' Register of Debates, 19 Cong, i Sess. 1825-1826, II., part 2, pp. 1767- 
1768. 

12 



178 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

even disapproved, the conduct of that Minister. Under these 
circumstances, the avowal of the pledge to the Mexican Govern- 
ment, which Mr. Poinsett has made, is well calculated to alarm 
the fears and the jealousy of the People of the United States. 

Under what circumstances was this pledge avowed, and 
what was the relative situation of the two countries? Our 
Minister was negotiating a commercial treaty with Mexico, and 
she had refused, in the most positive terms, to grant to the 
ISnited States a privilege which she had extended to the South 
American Republics. Upon this occasion, he claimed for us, as 
a matter of right, all the privileges which had been granted to 
them; and declared, as the foundation of this demand, that we 
stood pledged to protect them against any attack which might be 
made upon their independence, by any European nation except 
Spain ; and, in that event, we should be bound to bear the brunt 
of the contest. 

Now, Sir, if Mexico should be induced, by this positive 
declaration, to grant us commercial privileges, which she would 
not otherwise have granted, I ask if we are not bound, in honor 
and in good faith, to carry it into effect ? The expressions used 
by our Minister were not mere idle diplomatic phrases. They 
were used for the purpose of obtaining commercial advantages; 
and were the basis upon which those advantages were to rest. 
They were held out as the consideration — as the inducement, to 
that Government ; and it is fairly to be inferred, from the docu- 
ments, that they received the approbation of the Secretary of 
State. Tt is time, then, the American People should inquire, 
and should distinctly know, whether this declaration was author- 
ized by the Executive branch of the Government. 

Mr. B. said, it was not his intention, at this time, to bring 
into discussion, even indirectly, the Mission to Panama. Upon 
that important subject, he would then express no opinion. He 
wished to know, precisely, whether Mr. Poinsett had exceeded 
his instnictions or not. He believed this knowledge was all- 
important. Tf the Executive had determined to abandon the 
course of policy which had been heretofore pursued, and to enter 
into entangling alliances with any Nation, the People should 
be informed of this determination. Tf such were not the inten- 
tion, is it honorable; is it consistent with our National character; 
is it not a violation of the public faith, to hold out a pledge, for 
the purpose of deceiving Mexico, and then, after we shall have 
obtained the privileges which we desirefl. to mock at their ca- 



1826] MR. POINSETT'S NEGOTIATIONS 179 

lamity in the day of danger? Our intercourse with all Nations 
should rest upon principles of justice. What would the Govern- 
ment of Mexico think of us, what would they have a right to 
think, if our Minister should hold one language to-day. and, 
after we had obtained from them what we wanted, we should 
disclaim his authority to-morrow? In every point of view, Mr. 
B. thought the subject was well worthy of inquiry. 



REMARKS, MARCH 27, 1826, 

ON MR. POINSETT'S NEGOTIATIONS WITH MEXICO.' 

Mr. Buchanan said, he would vote in favor of the amend- 
ment which had been proposed by the gentleman from New York, 
(Mr. Verplanck) and against all the subsequent amendments 
which had been moved. He would proceed to give his reasons. 

I presume, said Mr. B., the gentleman from Massachusetts, 
(Mr. Webster) among others, alluded to me, when he stated 
that some gentleman had expressed an opinion that our Minister 
to Mexico had authority to make the declaration which he made 
to the Government of that country. I had other grounds for 
this belief beside mere opinion. It rests upon the uniform policy 
of the Executive branch of this Government, for several months 
past, as disclosed by the documents upon our table. 

The gentleman from Massachusetts (Air. Webster) is not 
certain there is blame any where. This opinion, in my judg- 
ment, cannot be supported. Had not Mexico refused to us the 
same treaty stipulation which she had granted to the Southern 
Republics? Had not the negotiation arrived at a crisis? Was 
it not about to be dissolved? In this critical moment, our Min- 
ister, for the first time, declared they should grant us the same 
advantages, because we stood in the same relative situation 
towards them, with the other Republics of this hemisphere. We 
stood pledged to support both their independence and their form 
of government, against any Power, except Spain, which should 
attempt to interfere with either. If Mr. Poinsett has obtained 
a treaty upon false and unfounded declarations of this nature, he 
is much, very much, to blame. But this is not all. He has pro- 
ceeded much further. In the latter part of the same letter, he 
states as follows : " I then recapitulated tlie course of policy 



'Register of Debates, 19 Cong, i Sess. 1825-1826, II., part 2, pp. 1808- 
1810. 



180 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

pursued towards the Spanish Colonies, by our Government, which 
had so largely contributed to secure their independence, and 
enable them to take their station among the Nations of the 
Earth : and declared zvhat further zve were ready to do in order 
to defend their rights and liberties; hut that this could only he 
expected from us, and could only be accomplished by a strict 
union of all the American Republics, on terms of perfect equality 
and reciprocity." 

Sir, said Mr. B,, I wish to see the answer of the Secretary 
of State to Mr. Poinsett's letter. In that letter he has certainly 
given a full and candid exposition of the state of the negotia- 
tion. It brought home distinctly to the knowledge of our Govern- 
ment, what kind of a treaty their Minister had demanded, and 
the stipulations which he had made for the purpose of obtaining 
it. If the answer to this letter should approve his conduct, in 
general terms; nay, if it should be silent upon the subject, the 
inference is irresistible, that our Executive wished the Mexican 
Government to grant us a treaty, under the impressions which 
had been made by his declarations. If they had not resolved to 
pursue this course of policy, it was their duty, promptly and 
decidedly, to disavow the declaration of their Minister. A tacit 
assent is equally strong, and equally binding with an express 
assent. If our Government should obtain and accept a treaty 
upon the terms stated to the Mexican Government by Mr. Poin- 
sett, it would be a violation of every principle of good faith 
among Nations, afterwards to attempt to extricate ourselves 
from the pledge, by declaring that he had no instructions to 
make such a stipulation. 

Independent of any express instructions, there is sufficient 
evidence in the documents before us, to create a belief, that our 
Minister was not mistaken in the general policy and views of the 
Executive. When our Government was invited to send Min- 
isters to Panama, the terms of the invitation w^ere explicit; they 
could not be mistaken. We were informed that the two prin- 
cipal subjects w'hich would engage the attention of the Con- 
gress, so far as the United States were concerned, would be our 
" resistance or opposition to the interference of any neutral Na- 
tion, ill the question and war of independence, between the new 
Powers of tlie Continent and Spain," and our " opposition to 
colonization in America by the European Powers." Mr. Obregon 
tells us, " after these two principal subjects, the Representatives 
of the United States may be occupied upon others." Having 



1826] MR. POINSETT'S NEGOTIATIONS 181 

presented this plain exposition of the views of his Government, 
he invited us to send Representatives to the Congress of Panama, 
" with express instructions in their credentials, upon the two 
principal questions." The letter of Mr. Salazar contains sub- 
stantially, the same declarations. 

Does the answer of the Secretary of State contain a whisper 
of dissent from the terms of this invitation? Do we accept the 
invitation conditionally? Do we declare we could enter into no 
treaty of alliance, for the purpose of carrying into effect the 
objects which the Southern Republics had in view? No, Sir. On 
the contrary, the invitation was accepted in the most general 
terms. There is one part of the letter of Mr, Salazar relating 
to this subject, which deserves particular attention: He states, 
that " this is a matter of immediate utility to the American States 
that are at war with Spain, and is in accordance zvith the repeated 
declarations and protests of the Cabinet at Washington." Was 
Mr. Salazar mistaken, and, if he were, why did not the Cabinet 
correct the mistake? Mr. B. observed, that he thought he had 
sufficiently shown it was not a mere opinion, without facts to 
support it, which had induced him to believe Mr. Poinsett was 
authorized to make the declarations which he had made to the 
Mexican Government. 

I confess, said Mr. B., it appears to me, that the great dan- 
ger of the mission to Panama, is, that our Government will there 
pursue this course of policy. If I shall be convinced this will not 
be the case, I will give my consent to the mission. As to Cuba 
and Porto Rico, I echo the sentiments of the President with all 
my heart. I would not agree that any nation on earth should 
wrest those islands from the dominion of Spain. With the 
exception of England, there is no Government in existence that 
I would not rather see in possession of them than the Govern- 
ment of Mexico. 

The United States have had sufficient experience of the 
inconvenience and the danger of entangling alliances. We once 
entered into such a treaty with France, and we were compelled 
to buy ourselves off at a great sacrifice. It is not my wish, said 
Mr. B., to be understood that this Government ought not, under 
any circumstances, to defend the independence of the Southern 
Republics. The principle for which I contend, is, that we should 
not be bound to do so by treaty, but be left free to act, with a 
proper regard to our own situation, when the crisis shall arrive. 

This resolution should be referred to the Committee of For- 



182 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

eio-n Relations. That Committee is, in its nature, confidential. 
Let them inquire, in the first place, and, if they want more infor- 
mation than they already possess, they can introduce a resolution 
for the purpose of obtaining it, by the authority of this House. 
I do not want merely the instructions which were given to Mr. 
Poinsett. I do not believe he received any express authority to 
form a treaty of alliance. It required no ghost to tell us that. 
I wish the Committee carefully to examine all the documents 
which have been published, or which may be in their power, and 
report to this House, whether Mexico may not have been de- 
ceived, whether she had not sufficient authority to believe we 
were pledged to support her independence, and whether, under 
this false impression, she might not grant us a treaty, accord- 
ing to our wishes. It is better to send the subject, at once, to 
that Committee. It will go to them without restriction. It can- 
not be sent to the President in that manner. We can only ask 
from him for such information as may be communicated without 
prejudice to the public interest. It is for these reasons that I 
give a decided preference to the amendment proposed by the 
gentleman from New York. 



RESOLUTION, APRIL 4, 1826, 

ON THE PANAMA MISSION.' 

Mr. Buchanan, who said he wished to offer a resolution. He 
did not intend, at present, to enter into any discussion upon 
the subject. His friend from Delaware (Mr. McLane) had 
mainly expressed his sentiments upon the subject. The gentle- 
man from Massachusetts, (Mr. Webster) had objected to the 
amendment proposed by the gentleman from Delaware, that it 
was attaching a condition to the resolution reported by the Com- 
mittee of Foreign Relations, unknown to the Constitution of the 
country, and might be considered as an instruction from this 
House to our Ministers at Panama. To obviate this objection, 
upon the intrinsic force of which he would not now express an 
opinion, he should offer the resolution which he would read to 
the Committee : 

Resolved, That, whilst this House regard the Republics of this continent 
with the warmest feelings of sympathy and friendship, and could not view 



* Register of Debates, 19 Cong, i Sess. 1825-1826, II., part 2, p. 2029. 



1826] FROM GENERAL JACKSON 183 

with indifference the hostile interposition of any European Power against 
their Independence; yet they deem it inexpedient to depart from the long 
settled policy of this •country, by entering into an alliance, offensive or 
defensive, with any nation, by which the People of the United States would 
deprive themselves of the power freely to act, in any crisis, in such a manner 
as their own honor and policy may, at the time, dictate. 

The Committee then rose — and in the House the resolution 

offered by Mr. Buchanan was ordered to be printed. 



FROM GENERAL JACKSON.^ 

Hermitage April 8th 1826. 

Dear Sir 

I received by due course of mail your friendly letter of the 8th ult. — 
transmitting a resolution passed by the convention at Harrisburgh in which 
it is declared "that their confidence in me is unimpaired." This resolution 
adds another to the many obligations which I owe to the republicans of 
Pennsylvania, and which shall be cherished as long as the feelings of 
gratitude and the sentiments of patriotism have a place in my heart. What 
greater consolation could be offered to my declining years than the reflection 
that my public conduct, notwithstanding the difficulties thro which it has 
led me, can still be honored with testimonials so distinguished as this from 
the enlightened and patriotic Pennsylvanians ; I desire no greater. 

I have noted your remarks relative to Mr. Molton C. Rogers— every in- 
formation I have reed, concerning him, corroborates your account of him, 
and I have no doubt he fully merits the high character he sustains. 

We have received the result of the Panama question in the Senate — from 
the whole view of the subject I have been compelled to believe that it is a 
hasty unadvised measure, calculated to involve us in difficulties, perhaps war, 
without receiving in return any real benefit. The maxim that it is easier to 
avoid difficulties than to remove them when they have reached us, is too old 
not to be true : but perhaps this and many other good sayings are becoming 
inapplicable in the present stage of our public measures which seem to be so 
far removed from our revolution that even the language of Washington must 
be transposed in order to be reconciled to the councils of wisdom ! I hope I 
may be wrong. It is my sincere wish that this Panama movement may ad- 
vance the happiness and glory of the country, but if it be not a commitment 
of our neutrality with Spain, and indirectly with other powers, as for 
example Brazil, I have misconstrued very much the Justice of the anath- 
emas which have been pronounced upon the assembly at Verona as well 
as the true sense of the principles which form international law. Let the 
primary interests of Europe be what they may, or let our situation vary as 
far as you please from that which we occupied when the immortal Wash- 
ington retired from the councils of his country, I cannot see for my part 
how it follows that the primary interests of the United States will be 



^ Buchanan Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania. This letter is 
imperfectly printed in Curtis's Buchanan, I. 47. 



184 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

safer in the hands of others, than in her own ; or in other words, that it 
can ever become necessary to form entangling alliances, or any connection 
with the governments of South America which may infringe upon that 
principle of equality among nations which is the basis of their independ- 
ence, as well as all their international rules. The doctrine of Washington 
is as applicable to the present as to the then primary interests of Europe, 
so far as our own peace and happiness are concerned, and I have no hesi- 
tation in saying so far as the true interests of South America are concerned, 
maugre the discovery by Mr. Adams that if Washington was now with us 
he would unite with him in sending this mission to Panama. No one feels 
more for the cause of the South Americans than I do, and if the proper time 
had arrived, I trust that none would more willingly march to their defence. 
But there is a wide difference between relieving them from a combination 
of leagued powers, and aiding them in forming a confederation which can do 
no good as far as I am apprised of its objects; and which we all know, let 
its objects be the best, will contain evil tendencies. 

Believe me to be with great respect, your 

most obdt. servt. 

Andrev^ Jackson. 



SPEECH, APRIL 11, 1826, 

ON THE PANAMA MISSION.i 

The House having again resumed the consideration of the 
report of the Committee of Foreign Relations, approving the Mis- 
sion to Panama, with the amendments proposing a quahfication 
to the general expression of approbation thereof — 

Mr. Buchanan addressed the committee as follows : 

Mr. Chairman: I cannot say, with the gentleman from 
Virginia, (Mr. Powell) who spoke first in this debate, that I am 
no party man. To a certain extent, I am a party man. It is 
well known, that, at the last Presidential election, I gave my 
warm and decided support to the distinguished individual whom 
the People of this country sent to the House of Representatives 
with a large plurality of Electoral votes. It is my fixed purpose 
to give the same individual my feeble support, in the next contest. 
I shall consider the next election as an appeal from the House 
of Representatives to the People, for the purpose of reversing a 
precedent which I consider dangerous to their liberties. To this 
extent I am willing to confess myself a party man; as I never 
wish even to be suspected of fighting under false colors. 

If, however, any gentleman upon this floor has intended to 
charge me with being engaged in a factious opposition to the 

' Register of Debates, 19 Cong, i Sess. 1825-1826, II., part 2, pp. 2168-2182. 



1826] THE PANAMA MISSION 185 

measures of the present Administration, I now indignantly cast 
back the charge upon him, and pronounce it to be unfounded. A 
factious opposition consists in opposing wise measures, because 
they have been recommended by particular men. I never have, 
and never shall, pursue this course. It would be as impolitic 
as it is unjust. The People of the United States will never 
sustain such an opposition. If any circumstance, in which he 
had no concern could, in my native State, prostrate the illustrious 
individual whom she still delights to honor, it would be, that his 
friends in Congress were concerned in factiously opposing the 
measures recommended by the present Administration. But do 
gentlemen expect to carry everything in this House which may 
be proposed by the executive, merely by attempting to brand the 
opposition with the name of faction? I trust that such is not 
their intention. I feel certain if it be, ihey will be disappointed. 

I protest against the measure now before the committee 
being considered a party measure. I am willing to follow the 
example of the individual to whom I have already alluded, and 
judge the tree by its fruits. I have not a single feeling of per- 
sonal hostility against the present chief magistrate of this Union. 
I shall always endeavor to do him justice. There is, however, in 
my opinion, just cause of complaint against his friends on this 
floor, for endeavoring to make the subject before the committee 
a party question. The cause of liberty in South America is the 
cause of the whole American people not of any party. An oppo- 
sition to that sacred cause never will, never can, be cherished 
by the friends of that individual who refused to accept a mission 
to Mexico, merely because Mexico was then suffering under the 
despotic sway of a tyrant and a usurper. Nothing but a strong 
sense of duty will induce any gentleman upon this floor to resist 
his own inclinations, and to stem what seems to be the popular 
current, by giving his vote against this mission. 

I shall now proceed to discuss the subject under the various 
aspects in which it has presented itself to my mind. 

I know there are several gentlemen on this floor, who ap- 
prove of the policy of the amendments proposed, and wish to 
express an opinion in their favor; and who yet feel reluctant to 
vote for them, because it is their intention finally to support the 
appropriation bill. They think, if the amendments should be 
rejected, consistency would require them to refuse any grant of 
money to carry this mission into effect. I shall, therefore, ask 
the attention of the committee, whilst I endeavor to prove that 



186 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

there would not, in any event, be the shghtest inconsistency in 
this course. 

I assert it to be a position susceptible of the clearest proof, 
that the House of Representatives is morally bound, unless in 
extreme cases, to vote the salaries of Ministers who have been 
constitutionally created by the President and Senate. The ex- 
pediency of establishing the mission was one question, which 
has already been decided by the competent authority; when 
the appropriation bill shall come before us, we will be called 
upon to decide another and a very different question. Richard 
C. Anderson and John Sergeant have been regularly nominated 
by the President of United States to be Envoys Extraordinary 
and Ministers Plenipotentiary " to the Assembly of American 
nations at Panama." The Senate, after long and solemn deliber- 
ation, have advised and consented to their appointment. These 
Ministers have been created — they have been called into existence 
under the authority of the Constitution of the United States. 
That venerated instrument declares, that the President " shall 
have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, 
to make treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present 
concur : and he shall nominate, and, by and with the advice and 
consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public 
Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all 
other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not 
herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established 
by Law." What, then, will be the question upon the appropria- 
tion bill? In order to enable our* Ministers to proceed upon their 
mission, the President has asked us to grant the necessary appro- 
priation. Shall we incur the responsibility of refusing? Shall 
we thus defeat the mission which has already been established by 
the only competent constitutional authorities? This House has, 
without doubt, the physical power to refuse the appropriation, 
and it possesses the same power to withhold his salary from the 
President of the United States. The true question is, what is 
the nature of our constitutional obligation ? Are we not morally 
bound to pay the salaries given by existing laws to every officer 
of the Government? By the act of the first May, 1810. the 
outfit and salary to be allowed by the President to Foreign Min- 
isters are established. Such Ministers have been regularly ap- 
pointed to attend the Congress at Panama. What right then 
have we to refuse to appropriate the salaries which they have a 
right to receive, under the existing laws of the land? 



1826] THE PANAMA MISSION 187 

1 admit there may be extreme cases, in which this House 
would be justified in withholding such an appropriation. " The 
safety of the people is the supreme law." If, therefore, we 
should believe any mission to be dangerous, either to the exist- 
ence or to the liberties of this country, necessity would justify 
us in breaking the letter to preserve the spirit of the Constitu- 
tion. The same necessity would equally justify us in refusing 
to grant to the President his salary, in certain extreme cases, 
which might easily be imagined. 

But how far would your utmost power extend? Can you 
re- judge the determination of the President and Senate, and 
destroy the officers which they have created? Might not the 
President immediately send these Ministers to Panama; and, if 
he did, would not their acts be valid? It is certain, if they 
should go, they run the risk of never receiving a salary; but 
still they might act as Plenipotentiaries. By withholding the 
salary of the President, you cannot withhold from him the power ; 
neither can you, by refusing to appropriate for this mission, 
deprive the Ministers of their authority. It is beyond your 
control to make them cease to be Ministers. 

The constitutional obligation to provide for a Minister, is 
equally strong as that to carry into effect a treaty. It is true, 
the evils which may flow from your refusal may be greater in 
the one case than the other. If you refuse to appropriate for a 
treaty, you violate the faith of the country to a foreign nation. 
You do no more, however, than omit to provide for the execu- 
tion of an instrument which is declared by the Constitution to be 
the supreme law of the land. In the case which will be pre- 
sented to you by the appropriation bill, is the nature of your 
obligation different? I think not. The power to create the Min- 
ister is contained in the same clause of the Constitution with that 
to make the treaty. They are powers of the same nature. The 
one is absolutely necessary to carry the other into effect. You 
cannot negotiate treaties without Ministers. They are the means 
by which the treaty-making power is brought into action. You 
are, therefore, under the same moral obligation to appropriate 
money to discharge the salary of a Minister, that you would be 
to carry a treaty into effect. 

If you ask me for authority to establish these principles, 
I can refer you to the opinion of the first President of the 
United States — the immortal Father of his Country — who, in 
my humble judgment, possessed more practical wisdoyi. more 



188 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

political foresight, and more useful constitutional knowledge, 
than all his successors. 

I have thus, I think, established the position, that gentle- 
men who vote for the amendments now before the committee, 
even if they should not prevail, may, without inconsistency, give 
their support to the appropriation bill. 

I shall now proceed to the discussion of the proposed amend- 
ments; and, I must confess, I do not much admire their phrase- 
ology. I am far from thinking them the most happy specimen 
of the style of my friend from Delaware, (Mr. McLane.) They 
would be better, if they were much shorter; but, for every sub- 
stantial purpose, they meet my most cordial approbation. What 
are the two principles which they contain? They declare, as 
the opinion of this House, that the Ministers which we shall 
send to Panama, ought not to receive authority to enter into 
any alliance, offensive or defensive, with the Southern Republics, 
or even to negotiate upon the subject; neither ought they to be 
instructed to pledge this Government to maintain, by force, the 
principle, that no part of the American continent shall hence- 
forward be subject to colonization by any European Power. 
Their foundation rests upon the long and the well-settled maxim 
of the policy of this country — that we should avoid entangling 
alliances with all nations. 

What objections have been urged against these amend- 
ments? The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Webster) has 
contended that, if they should prevail, they will violate the con- 
stitutional power of the Executive, and will virtually amount to 
instructions from this House to our Ministers. I am at a loss 
to conceive how he will support this position. If the President 
had simply demanded from us an appropriation to carry the 
mission into effect, and such amendments had been offered to the 
bill, the objection would have been conclusive. 

The true state of the question before the committee will, of 
itself, obviate this difficulty. The President has sent two messages 
to this House; in the one, he asks for our opinion concern- 
ing the expediency of the mission, and, in the other, for an 
appropriation to carry it into effect. The first message was re- 
ferred to the Committee of Foreign Relations, who have reported 
in favor of the expediency of the measure; and the second to 
the Committee of Ways and Means, who have reported an appro- 
priation bill. It is the report of the Committee of Foreign Rela- 
tions which is now before this committee. The President should 



1826] THE PANAMA MISSION 189 

have been content with the appropriation alone. He and his 
friends ought not to have desired to obtain the opinion of this 
House, and thus to shelter themselves from the responsibility 
under our authority. They, however, have thought differently. 
The President, in his message, has detailed the objects of the 
mission; and the Committee of Foreign Relations have submit- 
ted to us an elaborate report approving of the whole of them, 
in the strongest and most general terms. Are this House obliged 
either to applaud or condemn the whole? Have they not the 
power to exercise their discretion? Must they declare either 
that all the objects of the mission are proper, or that they are all 
improper? If we have a discretion, which I think cannot be 
denied, we have the power to discriminate. We have the power 
of approving a part of the report of the Committee of Foreign 
Relations, and condemning the remainder. These amendments 
proceed no further. The resolution before the committee, when 
amended and adopted, will be neither more nor less than a simple 
opinion of this House, upon a subject which has been regularly 
brought before it for determination. By what logic the gentle- 
man from Massachusetts (Mr. Webster) will be able to prove 
that such a resolution will be an instruction from this House to 
our Minister, I am utterly unable to comprehend. 

This House has always exercised the power of expressing 
its opinion upon great political questions, whether of a foreign 
or domestic nature, by means of resolutions. Until this debate 
commenced, nobody ever thought that such a course was an 
improper interference with the prerogatives of the Executive. 
A new era must have commenced, or such a doctrine would not 
be supported. 

If these amendments should prevail, the mission will still go 
to Panama free and unrestricted. The President, in framing 
his instructions, will give to the opinion of this House so much 
weight, as, in his judgment, it deserves. He will be at liberty to 
disregard it altogether, if he thinks proper. This alleged attempt 
upon the part of the friends of the amendment, to instruct our 
Ministers, has not the least foundation in fact. 

I now come to a question of great importance in this dis- 
cussion. Does the information before the House justify the 
proposed amendments, and render them necessary? or, are they 
mere abstract propositions, in no manner connected with the 
subject? I have never been more mistaken if I shall not be 
able to demonstrate, that, from the uniform course of policy 



190 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

which has been pursued by the present Administration, they are 
already committed to such an extent that it will be exceedingly 
difficult for them to retrace their steps and extricate themselves 
without giving just cause of offence to the Southern Republics. 
In my opinion, a crisis has now arrived, in which it is the duty 
of this House to take a firm stand in favor of the ancient and 
the approved policy of the country. We should proclaim to the 
world, that it is our determination " to preserve peace, com- 
merce, and friendship, with all nations, and to form entangling 
alliances wath none." 

It wnll here be necessary to take a short historical view of 
our relations with the Southern Republics. Within the last few 
years, we have seen in this Hemisphere, seven new Republics 
emerging from the chaos of Spanish Colonial despotism. The 
w-hole American People beheld this cheering spectacle with heart- 
felt satisfaction. We watched their progress with the most in- 
tense anxiety, and, marching in the van of nations, we first 
declared them to be free, sovereign, and independent. This 
declaration now is, and will forever continue to be, one of the 
most glorious events in our annals. It was made on the fourth 
of May, 1822, and all hailed it with pride, and with pleasure. 
In the Summer of 1823, the Holy Alliance, at the request of 
Spain, were called upon to assist in subjugating, what she was 
pleased to call her revolted colonies. The most serious appre- 
hensions were then entertained, that an unholy crusade was to 
be proclaimed against the cause of liberty and Republican Gov- 
ernment, wherever they existed over the whole earth. In this 
alarming posture of affairs, did we give any pledge to foreign 
nations? Did we commit the faith of the country to all, or any 
of the Southern Republics? Certainly not. We maintained the 
same independent position which we had always occupied in our 
relations with foreign nations. The celebrated message of Mr. 
Monroe, of December 2d, 1823, announced to the Holy Alliance, 
and to the world, that w^e could not view with indifference the 
hostile interposition of any European powder against the inde- 
pendence of the Southern Republics; but would consider such 
an attempt as dangerous to our own peace and safety. This 
declaration was re-echoed by millions of freemen. It was 
received with enthusiasm in every part of the Union. It an- 
swered the purpose for which it was intended, and the danger 
which then threatened the Southern Republics has since passed 
away. 



1826] THE PANAMA MISSION 191 

This declaration contained no pledge to any foreign Govern- 
ment. It left us perfectly free : but it has since been converted 
into such pledge by the present Administration; and, although 
they have not framed formal alliances with the Southern Re- 
publics, yet they have committed the country in honor to an 
alarming extent. 

The present Secretary of State has always been an enthusiast 
in favor of the Southern Republics. He has gone to such ex- 
tremities in their cause, that, in this particular, prudent men 
would feel disposed to compliment his heart at the expense of 
his understanding. I have no doubt his conduct has proceeded 
from the ardor of his nature in the cause of liberty ; and, there- 
fore, I shall be the last man to visit it with censure. 

From the date of the message of Mr. Monroe, until the 
present Administration came into power, we have never heard 
that any attempt was made to convert it into a pledge to any 
of the Southern Republics. No sooner had the present Secre- 
tary taken possession of the chair of State, than our policy was 
changed. Mr. Poinsett was sent as Minister to Mexico, to 
obtain a commercial treaty from that Government. In his in- 
structions, which bear date on the 25th of March, 1825, and 
which were never communicated either to the Senate or to this 
House, until the 30th of March, he was directed to impress the 
principles of Mr. Monroe's message upon the Government of the 
United Mexican States. He was also instructed to urge upon 
that Government " the utility and expediency of asserting the 
same principles on all proper occasions." Was not this a direct 
departure from the course which the former Administration had 
pursued? Are not these instructions substantially to this effect? 
We wish to enter into a treaty of commerce with you : we have 
determined that no European Power shall interfere between any 
of the Southern Republics and Spain, in their war for independ- 
ence ; nor shall they attempt to colonize any part of this continent : 
we, therefore, urge you to act in concert with us in asserting 
the same principles. The truth is, the Secretary evidently con- 
sidered it as a pledge, and sent it forth as such to foreign nations. 
How was it understood by Mexico? During the last Summer, 
it was apprehended by that Government that France was about 
to invade the Island of Cuba. We were then instantly called 
upon to redeem our pledge, and protect that Island against the 
fleet and army of France. On this occasion did the Secretary 
attempt, either directly or indirectly, to deny the existence of 



192 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

such a pledge to Mexico? On the contrary, in his letter to Mr. 
Poinsett, of the 9th of November last, he expressly recognises 
our obligation, and leaves the Mexican Government to infer 
what we Avould have done had the contingency happened, from 
a despatch which he had sent to the American Minister at Paris. 
This despatch contained an express declaration that the Govern- 
ment of the United States could not consent to the occupation of 
the Islands of Cuba and Porto Rico by any other European 
Power than Spain, under any contingency. Was not this a 
formal recognition of the pledge, on the part of our Executive? 
But is this all? No; very far from it. It is unnecessary again 
to repeat the strong language of Mr. Poinsett to the Ministers of 
Mexico upon this subject, which has been so often repeated on 
this floor. It is so clear and conclusive a pledge that, with 
respect to it, there can be no mistake or misapprehension. This 
language was communicated to Mr. Clay, in the letter of the 28th 
of September. That gentleman when called upon by this House 
for his answer, informed us that none had been transmitted. He 
has since discovered that he was mistaken, and has transmitted 
us the answer to Mr. Poinsett's letter, which had been accidentally 
overlooked. Does this letter of Mr. Clay disapprove the decla- 
ration of Mr. Poinsett to the Mexican Government? We know 
that it does not. An implied assent is as strong as an express 
assent. Mr. Poinsett, from his instructions, and from the whole 
correspondence, stands completely justified before his country for 
the declarations he has made. In this manner our country, so 
far as it can be committed by the Administration, has been 
pledged to Mexico to pursue the course of policy which I have 
endeavored to delineate. 

How^ shall we extricate ourselves from these obligations to 
Mexico? Shall we say to them : true it is, we have attempted to 
obtain from you the same commercial privileges which you are 
willing to grant to the other Republics of this continent, by 
declaring to you that we form a part of what is called the great 
American system, and that we are pledged to maintain your inde- 
pendence by war, if that should become necessary, '' and to bear 
the brunt of the contest." True it is we know in what manner 
you understood our declarations, and we have expressly recog- 
nized your construction, by declaring our determination to carry 
it into efYect against France, if she should attempt to invade the 
Island of Cuba. True it is, that when the nature of the pledge 
was distinctly brought home to our Government by Mr. Poinsett, 



1826] THE PANAMA MISSION 193 

we never whispered a word against its binding force. But yet 
you were entirely mistaken in its nature. Mr. Clay, whilst the 
House of Representatives had the subject under debate, has 
declared, that it was a pledge, not to you, but to ourselves and our 
posterity. You have, therefore, no interest whatever in this 
pledge, and we can release ourselves from it as soon as we shall 
think proper. 

I ask if any man of honor, after he had committed himself 
to his neighbor in this manner, and had thus attempted to 
obtain an advantage from him, could afterwards say, without 
forfeiting his character, I merely pledged myself to myself. I 
can, and will, redeem myself from my pledge; and you must 
suffer the loss and the disappointment. 

In my opinion, the friends of the Administration on this 
floor ought to be most anxious that these amendments should 
prevail. They would be the best justification of the President 
at Panama. He could then say with propriety, that, whatever 
might have been his own inclination in relation to this pledge, 
the House of Representatives had declared it should never have 
their sanction. 

I think, sir, I have already shown, that the documents upon 
our table contain sufficient reasons for the adoption of these 
amendments. But I shall not rest here. I will proceed to an- 
other most important branch of the subject. In the first place, 
however, it will be necessary to present before the committee a 
view of the precise character of the Congress of Panama. It is 
certainly not difficult to understand its nature; but, in my judg- 
ment, it has not yet been correctly explained. If you would look 
for its true character, you must examine the treaties to which it 
owes its existence. They form a perpetual alliance, offensive 
and defensive, in peace and in war, between those Republics who 
are parties to them. They create, to use their own language, " a 
perpetual union, league, and confederation." The Congress of 
Panama will be composed of Plenipotentiaries from all the South- 
ern Republics, " for the purpose of establishing, on a more solid 
basis, the intimate relations which should exist between them 
all, individually and collectively, and that it may serve as a coun- 
cil in great events, as a point of union in common danger, as a 
faithful interpreter of public treaties when difficulties may arise, 
and as an arbitrator and conciliator in their disputes and differ- 
ences." It appears, then, that the first object intended to be 
accomplished by the Congress of Panama is, to establish a strict 

13 



194 THE ^VORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

and intimate alliance and union between all and each of the seven 
Republics which have freed themselves from the yoke of Spain. 
Should this be accomplished, to the extent which they intend, I 
shall look upon the day of its consummation as the darkest which 
this country will ever have beheld. We shall then be compelled 
either to become a member of the Confederacy or stand alone 
upon this continent against seven independent and powerful na- 
tions. If, for the preservation of the honor or the interest of 
the American People, we shall be compelled to go to war wnth one 
of these Republics, the whole continent of America, South of our 
own territory, will be marshalled in hostile array against us. 
War with one must be war wdth all. Such an alliance may not 
be so dangerous to our liberties as a league betw^een monarchs; 
but, the calm of despotism, however dreadful it may be to the 
subjects of the despot, does not present to foreign nations the 
same terrors that would be presented by a confederation of 
young, and vigorous, and ambitious Republics. I trust in God 
that the Ministers who may be sent to Panama will be instructed 
to use their best exertions to break up this Congress. With 
whatever favor it may now be regarded by the American People, 
the time wall come, ere long, when it will be looked upon as an 
object of jealousy and apprehension. If this Congress should 
accomplish the purpose for which it has been conveyed, our hope 
must then be, that it will share the fate of nearly all the con- 
federacies w^hich have ever existed. Our Ministers should w^arn 
them by the examples of history, by the precepts of Washington, 
to avoid entangling alliances with each other. They should 
admonish them of the danger of jealousy and civil war. They 
should tell them that such a league, instead of being their pro- 
tection, might become their ruin. 

It is clear to my mind, from the documents in our posses- 
sion, that the President, in balancing the difficulties of our situ- 
ation, thought it better, this country should incur the danger of 
becoming eventually a party to this alliance, than stand alone. 
He must have foreseen, and it is evident he did foresee, that this 
Government, whatever might be its intention by sending Ministers 
to the Congress of Panama, would be insensibly drawn into the 
Confederation ; that the Congress, from the nature of the objects 
to which its attention will be directed, must be perpetual. After 
the alliance shall have been completely formed, it will remain 
as the council in great events, and the point of Union in com- 
mon danger for the Confederacy. I am free to admit, that, in 



18261 THE PANAMA MISSION 195 



J 



my opinion, it will not be an assembly of Sovereign States, like 
our old Confederation. Its powers, however, are more than 
merely diplomatic. It possesses judicial authority to fix the con- 
struction and decide upon the true meaning of public treaties 
between members of the Confederacy. It will also be the arbi- 
trator in all disputes and difficulties which may arise. Whether 
it will possess the power of carrying its decrees into effect, I 
cannot detemiine, as the treaties are silent upon that subject. 
The President, when he accepted the invitation given to this 
country to be represented by the Ministers in that Congress, knew 
that their very attendance there might produce a strong sympathy 
between us and the confederates. That, whatever instructions 
might be given in the beginning, we should, probably, in the end, 
be drawn into an alliance. This is a view of the subject entirely 
distinct from any question which has arisen, either respecting 
our neutrality in the war between Spain and her former colonies, 
or our pledge to maintain their independence and form of gov- 
ernment. It looks beyond both. The President, in his message 
to the House, has met this question fairly. I shall quote his 
own language. He says, " among the inquiries which were 
thought entitled to consideration, before the determination was 
taken to accept the invitation, was that, whether the measure 
might not have a tendency to change the policy, hitherto invar- 
iably pursued by the United States, of avoiding all entangling 
alliances, and all unnecessary foreign connexions." 

Does the President deprecate this event, which his sagacity 
had foreseen? Does he declare that this shall never be our 
policy, and that he will take the necessary means to prevent it? 
On the contrary, knowing that the American People considered 
an adherence to the farewell address of the man who was first 
in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen, 
to be the palladium of their safety, he has, by a long and ingeni- 
ous argument, attempted to destroy its force. He has en- 
deavored to prove that its principles did not apply to the South- 
ern Republics, and that General Washington himself, under exist- 
ing circumstances, would have entered into close alliance with 
them. And has it come to this? Was it not enough to have 
abandoned the principles of that immortal man, without attempt- 
ing, by ingenuity, to turn them in direct opposition to their 
plain and palpable meaning? I do not wish to cast any reflec- 
tions upon the character of the present President. 1 believe him 
to be a great statesman, and, perhaps, as well versed in the theory 



19G THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

of diplomacy as any man now living. I must, however, be per- 
mitted to say, that he has attempted to explain away the prin- 
ciples of the Farewell Address. No man who reads his message 
can entertain a doubt on the subject. And, yet, his friends in 
this House say there is no cause of alarm; there is no necessity 
for adopting the amendments — if we did, they would show a 
want of proper confidence in the Executive. I should have been 
glad if my friend from Massachusetts (Mr. Everett) had given 
us any explanation of this part of his Message in his Report. 
He has not thought proper to do so, but has ingeniously passed it 
over without comment. Is it not, then, necessary to adopt these 
amendments, for the purpose of declaring that, in our opinion, 
the policy of Washington should still prevail? 

There is still another forcible reason which may be urged in 
favor of these amendments. Upon this part of the subject I 
shall be brief, as it has been fully discussed by others. When 
the Ministers of Mexico and Colombia invited us to send Repre- 
sentatives to the Congress of Panama, they explicitly stated the 
subjects in the discussion of which it was expected our Ministers 
would take part. We were distinctly told that " one of the sub- 
jects which will occupy the attention of the Congress will be the 
resistance or opposition to the interference of any neutral nation 
in the question and war of independence between the new Powers 
of the Continent and Spain," and the other, " the opposition to 
colonization in America by the European Powers." These were 
to be " the two principal subjects," and our Government was 
informed that it was expected their Ministers should be fur- 
nished with " express instructions in their credentials " upon 
these two principal questions. It is true, that both the Ministers 
from Mexico and Colombia declared they did not wish this 
Government to compromit its neutrality by taking part in those 
discussions which related to the war then in existence between 
them and Spain. In discussing this part of the case, the gentle- 
man from Louisiana (Mr. Brent) has fallen into a great mis- 
take. He has exclaimed — has not the President declared that 
our neutral relations shall not be afifected? True, he has, and, 
therefore, on that subject, I feel no apprehension. But can any 
person pretend that it would compromit our neutrality to enter 
into an eventual alliance with these Republics, not to take effect 
unless some other European Power should interfere against their 
independence? It is clear, if we do not engage in the existing 
contest we would not violate our neutrality bv becoming parties 



1826] THE PANAMA MISSION 197 

to such a treaty. This distinction is expressly taken by the 
Ministers of Mexico and Colombia themselves. Has the Presi- 
dent any where declared that he will take no measures for the 
purpose of making such an eventual alliance as I have men- 
tioned ? In his message to the Senate, he has stated that " It will 
be seen that the United States neither intend, nor are expected, 
to take part in any deliberations of a belligerent character ; that 
the motive of their attendance is neither to contract alliances nor 
to engage in any undertaking or project importing hostility to 
any other nation." This language plainly refers to such an alli- 
ance as would affect our neutral character, and to no other ; and 
I have looked in vain for any part of the message to the House, 
from which a different inference could be deduced. 

In the letter of the Secretary of State, by which the invita- 
tion was accepted, "whilst he declares that our Ministers will 
not be authorized to enter upon any deliberations, or to concur in 
any acts inconsistent with the present neutral position of the 
United States, and its obligations, they will he fully empowered 
and instructed upon all questions likely to arise in the Congress 
on subjects in zvhich the nations of America have a common 
interest." The acceptance of the invitation is in the most gen- 
eral terms. Our Ministers (says the Secretary) will be author- 
ized to discuss, and will be instructed upon, every question, except 
those which may affect our present neutrality. Are the com- 
mittee, then, prepared to say that our Ministers to Panama shall 
enter into negotiations concerning such an eventual alliance as 
the Ministers from Mexico and Colombia have suggested? If 
they are not, they will adopt the amendments proposed. 

We are still told we should have confidence in the Executive, 
and it would show a want of sufficient confidence in that branch 
of the Government, to adopt the amendments. On this subject 
I agree with the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Rives) that this 
is no case for confidence. What, sir, confidence against the 
record and the documents before you? When they speak one 
language, are you to believe they intend another? 

But there are other circumstances connected with this ques- 
tion, which have deprived me of any ground for confidence, in 
relation to this particular subject. The invitation to attend the 
Congress of Panama was accepted by the Executive but six days 
before the meeting of Congress. I put it to every gentleman 
who now hears me, what ought to have been their conduct? 
Ought not the President to have waited for the meeting of the 



198 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

Senate, and taken the opinion of his constitutional advisers? 
It is admitted by all to have been a decision of great novelty, 
and of vast importance; why, then, did he choose at once to 
rush into the arms of our new allies, rather than wait the brief 
space of six days? His immediate predecessor did not pursue 
such a course. He had established a memorable precedent, which 
should have been followed on this occasion. When he thought 
the time had arrived to recognise the independence of the South- 
em Republics, he first asked an appropriation, to enable him to 
send Ministers to them; and thus he obtained the fair and un- 
biased opinion of Congress. Why was not this salutary example 
followed? What does the precipitancy of the present Adminis- 
tration argue? What might an enemy infer from their conduct? 
Might l;e not say that, believing it to be a subject which would 
arouse the best feelings of the American People, they wished to 
appropriate to themselves all the popularity and glory of the mis- 
sion ; that they could thus commit the country to such an extent, 
that the Senate would not dare to resist their application? If such 
were their intention, they have been mistaken. True it is, they 
have so far committed the country, and excited the expectation of 
the new Republics, that it would now be much more impolitic 
for us not to go to the Congress of Panama than to go; yet the 
Senate have so restrained the ardor of the Executive as to deprixe 
the mission of much of its danger. 

When I look to that venerable body, I cannot sufficiently 
admire the wisdom of our ancestors, in placing them as a check 
upon the conduct of the Executive. I most sincerely believe, if 
this mission had gone to Panama, with the powers at first con- 
templated, the country would, ere this, have been dangerously 
committed to the Southern Republics. The Senate are entitled 
to the praise of having taken the sting from it, and having ren- 
dered it comparatively harmless. 

The President, in his message to the Senate, has declared 
that he deemed it to be within the constitutional competence of 
the Executive to send Ministers to Panama. He applied to the 
Senate, not because he thought their sanction necessary, not be- 
cause he believed he could not act without it, but because he 
wished to evince a proper degree of deference for their opinion. 

This, it appears to me, is an assumption of power on the part 
of the Executive, unknown to the Constitution. That instrument 
makes it his duty " to give Congress, from time to time, infor- 
mation of the state of the Union." From this dutv results his 



1826] THE PANAMA MISSION 199 

power of sending agents abroad, merely for the purpose of obtain- 
ing information. This power has been often exercised. But, by 
what authority the President could claim the right of sending 
Plenipotentiaries to Panama, without the consent of the Senate, 
I am utterly at a loss to determine. 

There is another reason, which has shaken my confidence in 
the Executive, so far as respects this mission. The Senate were 
anxious to discuss this measure with open doors. They, there- 
fore, requested the President to inform them, whether the publi- 
cation of the documents necessary to be referred to in debate, 
would be prejudicial to existing negotiations. He, however, 
fixed the seal of confidence upon the proceedings, and held them 
bound to secrecy fast as the grasp of death. But no sooner 
had the Senate decided the question, than he himself published 
to the world these very documents, and accompanied them by 
a message, which is, in fact, but an answer to the report of the 
Committee of Foreign Relations to the Senate. The reply is 
thus made to precede the argument. And thus it was expected 
first to seize upon the feelings of the People of the United States, 
and get them committed against the Senate. It is not for me to 
say this conduct was wrong; but I know, if I were a Senator, 
I should feel it most sensibly. In this reply, whenever the argu- 
ment of the Committee of Foreign Relations was unanswerable, 
the President changed his ground, and presented the matter to 
the House in an aspect entirely different. I shall present an 
example before the committee, to illustrate this position. 

The President, in his message to the Senate, distinctly 
stated, that one object which he had in view in accepting the 
invitation, was to influence the Southern nations to change their 
political constitutions in regard to their established religion, and 
to introduce universal toleration. From the state of public opin- 
ion in those countries, an attempt of this nature would spread 
one universal flame over the whole Southern continent. With 
whatever justice the enemies of the Catholic religion may say it 
has been a scourge to liberty in other countries, it has certainly 
been a blessing to the Southern Republics. Its ministry, so far 
from having set themselves in array against the principles of 
liberty, took a leading and an efficient part in accomplishing the 
revolution. This assertion is true, in its utmost extent, in rela- 
tion to Mexico. The President, having discovered the danger 
of such an interference, at the present time, very prudently 
changed his attitude in his message to this House, and now only 



200 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

intends to ask, at Panama, what I feel confident all the nations 
will grant, without the least difficulty — the liberty to our citizens, 
while they reside within any of the Republics, of worshipping 
their God according to the dictates of their own conscience. 

I come, now, to speak of a subject deeply interesting to my 
own constituents, and to the State which I have the honor, in 
part, to represent, as well as the rest of the Union. We have often 
been told, as an argument against these amendments, that they 
imply a want of confidence in the executive. Judging from their 
conduct in relation to the Island of Cuba, I am justified in 
declaring, that my confidence in them is shaken, in everything 
which regards the Southern Republics. England and France 
have been warned by our government, in the most solemn and 
formal manner, that we could not consent to the occupation of 
that island by any other European power than Spain, under any 
contingency whatever. Ought not the same course to have been 
pursued towards the South American Republics? The reasons 
for adopting this policy, as I shall presently show, are at least as 
strong in the one case as in the other; but, yet, the documents 
prove that the Cabinet had arrived at a different conclusion. 
From them, it is evident, that our government did not intend to 
interfere for the purpose of preventing an invasion of that island 
by Mexico and Colombia. Mr. Clay, in his letter of December 
last, to the ministers of these two nations, requested, only, that 
their invasion of Cuba might be suspended until the result of our 
interference in their favor with the European powers should be 
ascertained. In his letter to Mr. Middleton, our minister at 
St. Petersburg, dated in May last, which he read to the Ministers 
of Mexico and Colombia, he entered into a long argument to 
justify an invasion of that island by those Republics, in case 
Spain should prove obstinate, and not recognize their independ- 
ence. I will not trouble the committee by reading this despatch 
to them, as it is in the hands of every member. 

The vast importance of the Island of Cuba to the people of 
the United States, may not be generally known. The commerce 
of this island is of immense value, particularly to the agricultural 
and navigating interests of the country. Its importance has been 
rapidly increasing for a number of years. To the middle, orgrain- 
growing States, this commerce is almost indispensable. The 
•'gg^regate value of goods, wares, merchandise, the growth, prod- 
uce, and manufacture, of the United States, exported annually 
to that island, now exceeds three millions and a half of dollars. 



1826] THE PANAMA MISSION 201 

Of this amount, more than the one-third consists of two articles, 
of pork and flour. The chief of the other products of domestic 
origin, are fish, fish-oil, spennaceti-candles, timber, beef, butter 
and cheese, rice, tallow-candles and soap. Our principal imports 
from that island are coffee, sugar, and molasses, articles which 
may almost be considered necessaries of life. The whole amount 
of our exports to it, foreign and domestic, is nearly six millions, 
and our imports nearly eight millions of dollars. The articles 
which constitute the medium of this commerce, are both bulky 
and ponderous and their transportation employs a large portion 
of our foreign tonnage. More than the one-seventh of the whole 
tonnage, engaged in foreign trade, which entered the ports of 
the United States during the year ending the last day of Septem- 
ber, 1824, came from Cuba; and but little less than that propor- 
tion of the tonnage employed in our export trade, sailed for 
that Island. Its commerce is, at present, more valuable to the 
United States, than that of all the Southern Republics united. 
How, then, can the American People ever agree that this island 
shall be invaded by Colombia and Mexico, and pass under their 
dominion? Ought we not to avert its impending fate, if pos- 
sible? The vast and fertile regions of Mexico and Colombia 
will produce, in abundance, nearly all the articles with which we 
now supply Cuba. If it should be revolutionized, and become 
an integral part of either of these Republics, the fate of this por- 
tion of our trade would at once be sealed. Disguise the fact as 
we may, Mexico is destined to become our rival. She already 
feels it and knows it. She already looks to war between us and 
the Southern Republics. When our Minister told her Plenipo- 
tentiaries that the power she desired to preserve of granting privi- 
leges to the Southern Republics which she wished to deny to us, 
would be useless to her, on account of our existing treaties with 
them, they hastily remarked, that war would dissolve all treaties. 
Shall we, then, stand, with our arms folded, and see this island 
pass into her possession? Shall we rest contented with having 
advised a simple suspension of its invasion merely with a view to 
the benefit of those Republics? 

Important as this island may be to us in a commercial, it is 
still more important in a political view. From its position, it 
commands the entrance of the Gulfs, both of Mexico and Florida. 
The report of our Committee of Foreign Relations truly says, 
" that the Moro may be regarded as a fortress at the mouth of 
the Mississippi." Any Power in possession of this Island, even 



202 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

with a small naval force, could hermetically seal the mouth of 
the Mississippi. Thus, the vast agricultural productions of that 
valley, which is drained by the father of rivers, mig^ht be de- 
prived of the channel which nature intended for their passage. 
A large portion of the People of the State, one of whose Repre- 
sentatives I am, jfind their way to market by the Mississippi. For 
this reason I feel particularly interested in this part of the subject. 
The great law of self-preservation, which is equally binding on 
individuals and nations, commands us, if we cannot obtain pos- 
session of this island ourselves, not to suffer it to pass from 
Spain, under whose dominion it will be harmless, and yet our 
government have never even protested against its invasion by 
Mexico and Colombia. 

There is still another view of the subject in relation to this 
island, which demands particular attention. Let us for a moment 
look at the spectacle which it will probably present in case 
Mexico and Colombia should attempt to revolutionize it. Have 
they not always marched under the standard of universal emanci- 
pation ? Have they not always conquered by proclaiming liberty 
to the slave? In the present condition of this island what shall 
be the probable consequence? A servile war, which in every age 
has been the most barbarous and destructive, and which spares 
neither age nor sex. Revenge, urged on by cruelty and ignorance, 
would desolate the land. The dreadful scenes of St. Domingo 
would again be presented to our view, and would again be acted 
almost within sight of our own shores. Cuba would be a vast 
magazine in the vicinity of the Southern States, whose explosion 
would be dangerous to their tranquillity and peace. 

Permit me here, for a moment, to speak upon a subject to 
which I have never before adverted upon this floor, and to which, 
I trust, I may never again have occasion to advert. I mean the 
subject of slavery. I believe it to be a great political and a great 
moral evil. I thank God, my lot has been cast in a State where 
it does not exist. But, while I entertain these opinions, I know 
it is an evil at present without a remedy. It has been a curse 
entailed upon us by that nation which now makes it a subject of 
reproach to our institutions. It is, however, one of those moral 
evils, from which it is impossible for us to escape, without the 
introduction of evils infinitely greater. There are portions of 
this Union, in which, if you emancipate your slaves, they will 
become masters. There can be no middle course. Is there any 
man in this Union who could, for a moment, indulge in the hor- 



1826] THE PANAMA MISSION 203 

rible idea of abolishing slavery by the massacre of the high- 
minded, and the chivalrous race of men in the South. I trust 
there is not one. For my own part I would, without hesitation, 
buckle on my knapsack, and march in company with my friend 
from Massachusetts [Mr. Everett] in defence of their cause. 

I am willing to consider slavery as a question entirely do- 
mestic, and leave it to those States in which it exists. The Con- 
stitution of the United States shall be my rule of conduct upon 
this subject. I have good reason to believe, that the honest, but 
mistaken attempts of philanthropists, have done much injury to 
the slaves themselves. These attempts generally reach the ears 
of the slave, and whilst they inspire him with false hopes of 
liberty, and thus make him disobedient, and discontented with his 
condition, they compel the master to use more severity, than 
would otherwise have been necessary. 

I think I have shown we are deeply interested in every 
thing which regards the fate of Cuba. I do, therefore, most 
sincerely rejoice, that the President has recently changed his 
policy concerning that island. He has. at length, come forward 
like a statesman, and with true magnanimity has corrected those 
errors into which he had previously fallen. In his late message 
to the House, we hear no more of requesting Colombia and 
Mexico to suspend their invasion, till the pleasure of Spain can 
be known; but he has told us distinctly, that, at the Congress 
of Panama, " all our efforts in reference to this interest will be 
to preserve the existing state of things, the tranquillity of the 
islands, and the peace and security of their inhabitants." This 
declaration is the strongest argument that could be urged, to my 
mind, in favor of the mission. 

Upon a review of the whole matter, let us inquire what 
will be the situation of our Ministers to Panama, if the amend- 
ments before the committee should not be adopted, and they shall 
pursue that course which the friends of the Administration assure 
us they will be instructed to pursue. Let us fancy to ourselves 
the spectacle which must there be presented. Let us suppose 
the first subject for the deliberation of the Congress to be the 
invasion of Cuba. Upon this occasion, the Representatives of 
the Southern Republics might, with propriety, address our Min- 
isters in the following language: Your Cabinet have justified 
our invasion of Cuba, in a despatch which they presented to the 
Russian Government and communicated to us: they asked, that 
the invasion might be suspended, until it could be ascertained 



204 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

whether Spain would acknowledge our independence; we have 
complied with their request, and we now know, from unquestion- 
able authority, that Spain still continues obstinate; we wish 
immediately to invade that island, and trust, if you have not 
determined to assist us in the contest, that you will, at least, 
accompany us with your sympathy and good wishes. What will 
be the only answer which our Ministers can give to such a re- 
quest? They must say, we cannot deny the truth of your asser- 
tions ; but the Cabinet of Washington have recently determined to 
change their policy in regard to this island. The President, in a 
late message to the House of Representatives, has expressed his 
determination that all our efforts shall be exerted to preserve this 
island under the dominion of Spain; and we can never consent 
that you shall set a hostile foot upon it. Will not this change 
of policy at once produce disappointment and jealousy towards 
us, among the Southern Republics ? Ought not the President to 
desire a resolution of this House to justify his intended course, 
in relation to this island, at the Congress of Panama ? 

Let us now suppose that the next subject which will occupy 
the attention of the Congress may be a concert or alliance between 
us and the Southern Republics, for the purpose of preventing the 
hostile interference of any European Power against their inde- 
pendence, and against the colonization of any part of this conti- 
nent. These were the two principal subjects which they expected 
our Ministers to discuss at Panama. They have so stated in 
their invitation, and our Secretary of State has accepted it in 
the most general terms. He has informed them that our Min- 
isters should be fully instructed upon every question likely to 
arise, except such as might interfere with our present neutrality. 
In addition to this promise, our Minister to Mexico has declared 
to them, that the United States stood pledged to resist the hostile 
interference of any European nation against their independence, 
by w^ar, and, in that event, we should be compelled to bear the 
brunt of the contest. When our Ministers shall be asked w^hat 
they have to say upon this subject, they will be compelled to 
declare, that, touching it, they have no authority to enter into 
any negotiation or discussion. May not the Southern Republics 
justly complain, that our Cabinet has made a promise to the ear 
and broken it to the sense? If our Executive has determined 
upon this course, as I trust he has, would it not be wise, and 
politic, and proper, that he should be sustained by the House 
of Representatives? These amendments would be his best apol- 



1826] THE PANAMA MISSION 205 

og}' and best excuse for disappointing the just expectations of 
the Southern RepubHcs. 

On the subject of preventing colonization in America, I have 
a word to say. Would it not be a most wonderful stipulation 
for our Government to make, for example, with Chili, that we 
will not permit our own Territory to be invaded by a foreign 
nation? And yet, such is the nature of the engagement which 
the President evidently had in his view. 

It would seem that this mission is to be still further diverted 
from its original purpose. We are told it is to be merely " con- 
sultative," and that our Ministers will possess no power, except 
that of receiving propositions, and transmitting them to the 
Cabinet at Washington. If all the allegations which have been 
made be true, they will have nothing to consult about, except 
the establishment of some new principles of international law. 
It seems we are about making an attempt to agree with the 
Southern Republics that " free ships shall make free goods," and 
that private war upon the ocean shall be abolished. It is also our 
intention to fix the principles of public law between us relative to 
blockades. 

As to blockades, I deny that there is any room for doubt in 
the law of nations. In relation to this subject, there is no prin- 
ciple unsettled. It is true, that both England and France, during 
their late struggle for existence, violated this law. France de- 
clared a blockade against the whole island of Great Britain, and 
Great Britain retaliated by proclaiming the whole coast of France 
to be in a state of blockade. Neutral commerce suffered; but 
both these Powers attempted to justify their conduct, not by the 
law of nations, but by the principles of retaliation and self- 
defence. 

In my opinion, we should not agree to abolish private war 
upon the ocean. War is, in itself, a great calamity: but, when 
a nation is obliged to engage in it to defend her rights, it is mercy 
to carry it on with such vigor as to conquer a speedy peace. 
If we should ever be compelled to go to war with, any one of 
the Southern nations, all the rest will be bound to enter into the 
contest against us. It is only by privateering that we shall be 
able to annoy them along all their coasts, both on the Atlantic 
and Pacific. From the vast extent of their seaboard, the Navy 
of England would not be sufificient to operate against them in 
every quarter. In the event of war, the hardy sons of the North, 
who have been accustomed to the perils of the sea, would rush 



206 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

out of their ports in privateers, and do them infinitely more injury 
than our whole Navy. 

If we could abolish privateering throughout the world, at 
the Congress of Panama, humanity would plead loudly in its 
favor. That, however, is impossible. Whilst it will continue 
to exist between us and all other nations, I am unwilling to de- 
prive this country of its most powerful means of annoyance 
against the Southern Republics. 

After all the explanations which have been made, if gentle- 
men are correct, the powers of our Ministers to Panama will be 
confined chiefly to two objects. The first to declare our good 
will towards the Southern Republics, and explain to them the 
reasons why we can do nothing for them ; and the second, to get 
early and correct information of their proceedings, and com- 
municate it to this Government. This last object is one of great 
importance. We have good reason to be jealous of this league. 
Would the Senators and Consuls of Rome have suffered such a 
Confederacy to be established at the very gates of the city? We 
should, if possible, dissolve it by peaceable means. 

We have ourselves grown great by standing alone, and pur- 
suing an independent policy. This path has conducted us to 
national happiness and national glory. Let us never abandon it. 
It is time for us once more to go back to first principles, and 
declare to the world that the policy of Washington has not grown 
old. Union at home, and independence of all foreign nations, 
ought to be our political maxims. Let us do good to all nations, 
but form entangling alliances with none. These are the prin- 
ciples of the amendments. Should they prevail, the Administra- 
tion will go to Panama with the confidence of the country, and 
Avith a strong vote. This is certainly a matter of consequence, as 
we should endeavor to present a united front in all our intercourse 
with foreign nations. 



RESOLUTION, APRIL 18 AND 20, 1826, 

ON THE PANAMA MISSION, AND REMARKS THEREON. ' 

Mr. Buchanan said, he rose to propose to his friends from 
Delaware and Virginia, [Mr. McLane and Mr. Rives] a modifi- 

' Register of Debates, 19 Cong, i Sess. 1825-1826, II., part 2, pp. 2368, 
2370, 2374. 2376, 2412-2413. This resolution was adopted by a vote of 99 to 
95. (Id. 2457.) 



18!26] THE PANAMA MISSION 207 

cation which would embrace all the important principles con- 
tained in both their amendments. He did not suggest this modi- 
fication because he believed it to be necessary, or because he him- 
self had felt the force of the objections which had been urged 
against any of the principles w^hich these amendments contained. 
He would cheerfully vote for them in their present form. Other 
gentlemen, however, thought it would be best to obviate all diffi- 
culties, and to present the subject in such a manner before the 
committee, that no man could, for one moment, believe the 
friends of these amendments intended by them to give instruc- 
tions either to the President or his Alinisters; or to do more than 
express the constitutional opinion of this House, upon a subject 
of immense importance, which had been brought, in a regular 
manner, before it for determination. The modification, if 
adopted, would test the sincerity of those gentlemen who had 
declared, that their only objection to the amendments now before 
the committee, was, that they contained an instruction from this 
House to the Ministers which would be sent to Panama. Mr. 
Buchanan then read his modification, as follows : 

The House, however, in expressing this opinion, do not intend to sanction 
any departure from the settled policy of this Government, that, in extend- 
ing our commercial relations with foreign nations, we should have with 
them as little political connection as possible ; and that we should preserve 
peace, commerce, and friendship, with all nations, and form entangling alli- 
ances with none. It is, therefore, the opinion of this House, that the Gov- 
ernment of the United States ought not to be represented at the Congress of 
Panama, except in a diplomatic character, nor ought they to form any alli- 
ance, offensive or defensive, or negotiate respecting such an alliance, with 
all or any of the Spanish American Republics ; nor ought they to become 
parties with them, or either of them, to any joint declaration for the pur- 
pose of preventing the interference of any of the European Powers with 
their independence or form of Government, or to any compact for the pur- 
pose of preventing colonization upon the continent of America ; but that the 
People of the United States should be left free to act, in any crisis, in such a 
manner as their feelings of friendship towards these Republics, and as 
their own honor and policy may at the time dictate. 

Mr. Rives withdrew his amendment, and Mr. McLane 
accepted Mr. Buchanan's resolution as a substitute for his own. 

Mr. Estill renew-ed the motion to rise, but withdrew it at the 
request of 

Mr. Buchanan, who said, that he rose again to repeat that 
every principle contained in the former amendment, is preserved 



208 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

in this. The very same language is employed, with this only dif- 
ference, that, as now modified, no gentleman, however fond of 
inference he might be, could possibly infer from it that this 
House is desirous of instructing either the President or his Min- 
isters. He was not in the least opposed to the committee's now 
rising, though he did not feel himself warranted in renewing a 
motion to that effect. 

He********* 

Mr. Buchanan here explained, and reminded the gentlemen 
from Maine that he had already expressed his willingness that 
the committee should rise. He had no desire to hurry any 
gentleman, or take him by surprise. 

5)-*^******* 

Mr, Buchanan said, he thought it must now appear evident 
to all that there was no disposition in the friends of the amend- 
ment to protract the debate. He thought that its warmest 
enemies could not now charge that upon them. He asked gentle- 
men if there was any prospect that a longer time would be occu- 
pied on the amendment, as modified, than had already been spent 
upon it. When his colleague [Mr. Ingham] took his seat, no 
gentleman had risen to follow him, and the debate was then 
considered as closed. The modification presented no new prin- 
ciples, but only tended to remove objections. He hoped, there- 
fore, that its friends would oppose the motion to discharge the 
Committee, and that the House would be left free to take a vote 
on the amendment in Committee to-morrow. 

********** 

Mr. Buchanan said, he was very glad that his friend from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Everett] had proclaimed to the House and to 
this country that he did not wish for the introduction of the reso- 
lution, but that he had been overruled, and that a resolution had 
been introduced, contrary to his wishes, which expressed the expe- 
diency, and not the constitutionality, of making an appropriation 
for a Mission to Panama. The House had long been engaged in 
discussing the expediency, but not the constitutionality of the 
measure. With the candor which belongs to him, that gentleman 
now declares that he wishes to lay the resolution on the table, with 
the express purpose that the House shall give no expression of its 
opinion on the expediency of the mission. If this course shall be 



1826] THE PANAMA MISSION 209 

taken, the declaration of the Committee will be abandoned. If 
this was the gentleman's wish, he saw no reason why the thing 
might not take that course. If a majority of the House wished 
to avoid any expression of opinion on the expediency of the 
mission, he saw no objection to closing the debate this evening, 
but he hoped there was no such majority. For himself, he should 
vote against discharging the Committee, and (should the Com- 
mittee be discharged) against laying the amendment on the table. 

*l> ?|^ '^ J|^ *!* ^> »P *p ?[% 3K 

[April 20.] Mr. Buchanan said, that, so far as he had power 
over the amendment, it would have afforded him sincere pleasure 
to accommodate the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. Mallary.] 
That, however, was impossible, upon the present occasion. If 
his proposition should prevail, what would then remain of the 
amendment will be comparatively of little value. 

The gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Trimble] did me no 
more than justice, when he stated that my amendment had been 
drawn with much care, and every expression had been deliberately 
considered. Whilst I was preparing it, I had the declaration of 
Mr. Monroe continually in view ; and was determined not to intro- 
duce a single word which might be construed, directly or indi- 
rectly, to conflict either with its letter or its spirit. The lan- 
guage of the amendment is precise, and is strictly confined to the 
expression of an opinion, that we ought not to become parties with 
the Southern Republics, to any joint declaration. It studiously 
avoids any condemnation of the message of Mr. Monroe. It does 
not express an opinion, that the President of the United States 
should not, under similar circumstances, make a similar declara- 
tion to the world. In such an event, however, it ought to be his 
own individual declaration, upon his own responsibility. These 
remarks will, I trust, be considered a sufficient answer to the first 
part of the argument of the gentleman from Maine [Mr. 
Sprague. ] 

That gentleman asks. May not the Holy Alliance be upon 
our borders in a few months, and should we then restrict the 
Executive? I confess I consider such an event very improbable 
indeed ; but, if it should occur, of what utility could it be to us to 
become parties to a joint declaration with any nation on earth? 
In such an emergencv, this country would take that firm and inde- 
pendent attitude, which becomes its character. It would defend 
itself without going abroad to seek for foreign connexions. 

14 



210 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

But, says the gentleman from Maine, [Mr. Sprague] we 
are assuming a prerogative over the Executive which does not 
become us. And has it come to this? Will the Representatives 
of the People shrink from a free declaration of their opinion, 
because gentlemen think such a declaration might be construed 
into a want of confidence in the Executive? Such an argument 
should never be used on this floor. No gentleman has a right to 
infer such a want of confidence from this or any other resolution 
which the House may adopt, within its constitutional power. 

The gentleman from Maine admits, that this House has a 
right to make an abstract declaration of the general course of 
policy which should be pursued by this Government. An abstract 
declaration ! Sir, such an one never will be made. This House 
never will, never ought to, discuss and decide mere abstract propo- 
sitions. If they did, they would be unmindful of their duty. 
Members were sent here to transact the business of the nation, 
and they would be without justification, if they should spend their 
time in maturing and adopting measures which did not bear prac- 
tically upon the interests of the People. Shall we, then, stand 
with our arms folded, and declare that we will not act upon this 
important subject, because it might imply a want of confidence 
in the President? I trust not. I have that degree of consti- 
tutional confidence in the present Executive, which, as a Repre- 
sentative of the People, I ought to feel. I do not profess to have 
more. The President himself has asked us for our opinion. We 
now propose to give it to him ; but, in doing so, we disclaim any 
power of instruction. The declaration which I trust we shall 
make, is in accordance with the established usage of this House, 
and will amount to nothing more than an expression of its opin- 
ion. Thus far we have an unquestionable right to proceed. Tt 
would be quite as logical for us to contend, that the President 
has no right to express an opinion to this House, upon a great 
political question, as it has been in gentlemen to deny to us the 
right of expressing our opinion upon the present occasion. 

The argument of the gentleman from Maine destroys itself. 
He admits we may make a general declaration, but we cannot 
a])ply it to a particular case. We may lay down the premises, but 
we cannot draw the conclusion. We may declare that we ought 
not to unite in a joint declaration with any nation on earth, but 
yet we cannot apply this declaration to the Southern Republics. 
I would ask the gentleman, if the power of making a general, 
does not necessarily include that of making a specific declara- 
tion of opinion. 



18:26] REVOLUTIONARY OFFICERS 211 

[Mr. Spragiie here explained. He said it was of little im- 
portance to talk to a deliberative body about its power. He 
neither admitted nor denied the power of the House to make 
such a general declaration.] 

Mr. B. said, from the explanation, he could not hope to con- 
vince the gentleman from Maine, who seemed willing to repose 
such implicit confidence in the Executive, and yet now professed 
himself unwilling to admit the power of this House to express 
any opinion as to the policy proper to be pursued by this country. 
That gentleman would act with perfect consistency in voting 
against the whole amendment. But how can gentlemen give such 
a vote who admit both the power of this House, and the policy 
of the principles contained in the amendment? Will they aban- 
don the exercise of a clear right, demanded in the present crisis, 
because it seems to imply a want of confidence in the Executive ? 

Every attempt to change the true character of the amendment 
will be vain. The question, and the only question, to be decided 
by this House, is, Shall the policy of Washington continue to 
prevail, or. are we now prepared to launch out and adopt new 
schemes which will naturally lead to entangling alliances with 
foreign nations? If we shall once abandon that policy, no human 
foresight can determine to what extent we shall be drawn. In 
every view which I can take of this subject, I hope the amend- 
ment, as modified, w^ill be adopted. 



REMARKS, APRIL 24, 1826, 

ON THE BILL FOR THE RELIEF OF REVOLUTIONARY OFFICERS.' 

;Mr. Buchanan spoke as follows : 

Mr. Chairman : It is with extreme reluctance I rise at this 
time to address you. I have made no preparation to speak, except 
that of carefullv reading the documents which have been laid 
upon our tables ; but a crisis seems to have arrived in this debate, 
when the friends of the bill, if ever, must come forward in its 
support. I do not consider that the claim of the officers of the 
Revolution rests upon gratitude alone. It is not an appeal to your 
generosity only; but to your justice. You OAve them a debt, in 
the strictest sense of the word ; and of a nature so meritorious, 
that, if you shall refuse to pay it. the nation will be disgraced. 
Formerly, when their claim was presented to Congress, we had. 



^Register of Debates, ig Cong, i Sess. 1825-1826, II., part 2, pp. 2540- 
2543- 



212 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

at least, an apology for rejecting it. The country was not then 
in a condition to discharge this debt, without inconvenience. But 
now, after forty years have elapsed since its creation, with a 
Treasury overflowing, and a national debt so diminished, that, 
with ordinary economy, it must, in a very few years, be dis- 
charged, these officers, the relics of that band which achieved your 
independence, again present themselves before you, and again ask 
you for justice. They do not ask you to be generous — they do 
not ask you to be grateful — but they ask you to pay the debt 
whicli was the price of your independence. I term it a debt, Sir; 
and it is one founded upon a most solemn contract, with which 
these officers have complied, both in its letter and in its spirit; 
whilst you have violated all its obligations. 

Let us spend a few moments in tracing the history of this 
claim. It arose out of the distresses of the Continental Army, 
during the Revolutionary war; and the utter inability of the 
Government, at that time, to relieve them. What, Sir, was the 
situation of that army, when it lay encamped at the Valley Forge? 
They were naked, and hungry, and barefoot. Pestilence and 
Famine stalked abroad throughout the camp. The first blaze of 
patriotism which had animated the country, and furnished the 
army with its officers, had begun to die away. These officers per- 
ceived that the contest would be long, and bloody, and doubtful. 
They had felt, by sad experience, that the depreciated pay which 
they received, so far from enabling them to impart assistance to 
their wives and children, or hoard up any thing for futurity, was 
not sufficient to supply their own absolute and immediate wants. 
Placed in this situation, they were daily sending in their resigna- 
tions, and abandoning the cause of their country. In this alarming 
crisis, Washington earnestly recommended to Congress to grant 
the officers half-pay. to commence after the close of the contest, 
as the only remedy for these evils, within their power. The coun- 
trv was not then able to remunerate the officers for the immense 
and unequal sacrifices which they were making in its cause. All 
that it could then do was to present them a prospect of happier 
days to come, on which hope might rest. With this view. Con- 
gress, in May. 1778, adopted a resolution allowing the officers, 
who should continue in service until the end of the war. half-pay 
for seven years. This resolution produced but a partial effect 
upon the army. The time of its continuance was to be but short ; 
and there were conditions annexed to it. which, in many cases, 
would have rendered it entirely inoperative. 



1826] REVOLUTIONARY OFFICERS 213 

In August, 1779, Congress again acted upon this subject, 
and resolved, " That it be recommended to the several States to 
grant half -pay for life to the officers who should continue in the 
service to the end of the war." This recommendation was disre- 
garded by every State in the Union, with one exception; and I 
feel proud that Pennsylvania was that State. She not only 
granted half-pay for life, to the officers of her own line, but she 
furnished them with clothing and with provisions. Thus, when 
the General Government became unable to discharge its duty to 
her officers and soldiers, she voluntarily interposed and relieved 
their distresses. Gen. Washington, when urging upon Congress 
the necessity of granting to the officers half-pay for life, pointed 
to those of the Pennsylvania line, as an example of the beneficial 
consequences which had resulted from that measure. 

Congress at length became convinced of the necessity of 
granting to the Continental officers half-pay for life. Without 
pay and without clothing, they had become disheartened, and were 
about abandoning the service. The darkest period of the Revolu- 
tion had arrived, and there was but one ray of hope left, to pene- 
trate the impending gloom which hung over the army. The 
officers were willing still to endure privations and sufferings, if 
they could obtain an assurance that they would be remembered by 
their country, after it should be blessed with peace and inde- 
pendence. They well knew Congress could not relieve their pres- 
ent wants; all, therefore, they asked, was the promise of a future 
provision. Congress at length, in October, 1780, resolved "that 
half-pay for life be granted to the officers in the army of the 
United States, who shall continue in service to the end of the 
war," 

Before the adoption of this resolution, so desperate had been 
our condition, that even Washington apprehended a dissolution 
of the army, and had begun to despair of the success of our cause. 
We have his authority for declaring, that, immediately after its 
adoption, our prospects brightened; and it produced the most 
happy effects. The state of the army was instantly changed. 
The officers became satisfied with their condition, and, under their 
command, the army marched to victory and independence. They 
faithfully and patriotically performed every obligation imposed 
upon them by the solemn contract into which they had entered 
with their country. 

How, Sir, did you perform this contract on your part? No 
sooner had the dangers of war ceased to threaten our existence — 



214 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

no sooner had peace returned to bless our shores, than we forgot 
those benefactors, to whom, under Providence, we owed our inde- 
pendence. We then began to discover that it was contrary to the 
genius of our Repubhcan institutions to grant pensions for Hfe. 
The jealousy of the People was roused, and their fea;rs excited. 
They dreaded the creation of a privileged order. I do not mean 
to censure them for this feeling of ill directed jealousy, because 
jealousy is the natural guardian of liberty. 

In this emergence, how did the Continental officers act? In 
such a manner as no other officers of a victorious army had ever 
acted before. For the purpose of allaying the apprehensions of 
their fellow-citizens, and complying with the wishes of Congress, 
they consented to accept five years full pay, in commutation for 
their half-pay for life. This commutation was to be paid in 
money, or securities were to be given on interest at six per cent, 
as Congress should find most convenient. 

Did the Government ever perform this their second stipula- 
tion to the officers ? I answer, no. The gentleman from Tennes- 
see [Mr. Mitchell] was entirely mistaken in the history of the 
times, when he asserted that the commutation certificates of the 
officers enabled them to purchase farms, or commence trade, upon 
leaving the army. Congress had not any funds to pledge for 
their redemption. They made requisitions upon the States, which 
shared the same fate with many others, and were entirely disre- 
garded. The faith and the honor of the country, whilst they 
were intrusted to thirteen independent and jealous State sov- 
ereignties, were almost always forfeited. We then had a General 
Government which had not the power of enforcing its own edicts. 
The consequence was, that, wdien the officers received their certif- 
icates, they were not worth more than about one-fifth of their 
nominal value, and they vei^y soon fell to one-eighth of that 
amount. 

Let gentlemen for a moment realise what must then have been 
the situation and the feelings of these officers. They had spent 
their best days in the service of their country. They had endured 
hardships and privations without an example in history. Desti- 
tute of every thing but patriotism, they had lived for years upon 
the mere promise of Congress. At the call of their country, they 
had relinquished half-pay for life, and accepted a new promise of 
five years' full pay. When they confidently expected to receive 
this recompense, it vanished from their grasp. Instead of money, 
or securities equal to money, which would have enabled them to 



1826] REVOLUTIONARY OFFICERS 215 

embark with advantage in civil employments, they obtained certifi- 
cates, which necessity compelled most of them to sell, at the rate 
of eight for one. The Government proved faithless, but they 
had, what we have not, the plea of necessity, to justify their con- 
duct. 

In 1790, the provision which was made by law for the pay- 
ment of the public debt, embraced these commutation certificates. 
They were funded, and the owner of each of them received three 
certificates ; the first, for two-thirds of the original amount, bear- 
ing an interest immediately of six per cent. ; the second for the 
remaining third, but without interest for ten years ; and the third 
for the interest which had accumulated, bearing an interest of only 
three per cent. 

What does this bill propose? Not to indemnify the officers 
of the Revolution for the loss which they sustained in consequence 
of the inability of the Government, at the close of the war, to 
comply with its solemn contract. Not, after the lapse of more 
than forty years, to place them in the situation in which they would 
have been placed had the Government been able to do them 
justice. It proposes to allow them even less than the difference 
between what the owners of the commutation certificates received 
under the funding system, and what these certificates, when 
funded, were worth upon their face. My colleague [Mr. Hemp- 
hill] has clearly shown, by a fair calculation, that the allowance 
will fall considerably short of this difference. If the question now 
before the committee were to be decided by the People of the 
United States, instead of their Representatives, could any man, 
for a moment, doubt what would be their determination? 

I hope, said Mr. B. my friend from Massachusetts [Mr. 
Dwight] will not urge the amendment he has proposed. Judging 
from past experience, I fear, if it should prevail, the bill will be 
defeated. Let other classes of persons, who think themselves 
entitled to the bounty of their country, present their claims to 
this House, and they will then be fully and fairly investigated. 
The surviving officers of the Revolution have already pursued this 
course. Their case has been thoroughly examined by a commit- 
tee, who have reported in its favor ; and all the information neces- 
sary to enable us to decide correctly, is now in our possession. I 
trust, therefore, their claim will be permitted to rest upon its own 
foundation. They are now old, and, for the most part, in pov- 
erty ; it is necessary, therefore, if we act at all, that we should act 
speedily, and do them justice without delay. In my opinion, they 



216 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

have a better claim to receive what this bill contemplates giving 
them, than any of us have to our eight dollars per day. 

In this case, gentlemen need apprehend no danger from the 
precedent. We shall never have another Revolutionary war for 
independence. We have no reason to apprehend we shall ever 
again be unable to pay our just debts. Even if that should again 
be our unfortunate condition, we shall never have another army 
so patient and so devoted as to sacrifice every selfish consideration 
for the glory, the happiness, and the independence, of their 
country. 

I shall vote against the proposed amendment, because I will 
do no act which may have a tendency to defeat this bill. 



TO GENERAL JACKSON.' 

Lancaster 21 Sep. 1826. 
Dear General/ 

Although I have nothing of importance to communicate, yet 
I feel disposed occasionally to trespass upon your time & indulge 
myself in the pleasure of writing to you. 

We are for once in a political calm in this State. Mr. Shulze 
will be re-elected Governor without opposition & upon the Presi- 
dential question there is not out of the City of Philadelphia a 
sufficient division in public sentiment to disturb our repose. In 
the large, wealthy & populous County in which I reside con- 
taining more than 70,000 people I feel confident Mr. Adams could 
not poll 500 votes. 

There was a most artful & powerful effort made against 
you in this State during the last Spring. They did not dare to 
attack you personally; but levelled all their artillery against Mr, 
Calhoun, Mr. Randolph, Mr. M'Duffie &c. but principally 
against the former & they endeavored to make you answerable for 
his political offences as presiding Officer of the Senate. They 
have succeeded to a considerable extent in injuring the popularity 
of Mr. Calhoun; but their arrows have fallen harmless at your 
feet. Your popularity throughout the State of Pennsylvania is 
fixed upon sure foundations which your enemies have not nor 
ever will be able to shake. 



' Buchanan Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania. 



1826] FROM DUFF GREEN 217 

Our Society in this City has had a most agreeable addition in 
Mr. Cheves & his family. He has purchased a farm within a 
mile of Lancaster & has taken up his residence amongst us with 
an intention as he says of laying his bones here. His sterling 
good sense & his agreeable manners have already made him a 
great favorite. Although he has been & still I believe is upon 
terms of personal friendship with Mr. Clay yet he disapproves 
highly of his recent political course — & does not hesitate upon all 
proper occasions to express his opinion. 

Our season in this part of the world has been dry & in 
consequence the crops have not been so abundant as usual. There 
are many cases of sickness throughout our Country but not many 
deaths. For several years past the Cities & large Towns in the 
Eastern portion of this State have been much more healthy than 
the Surrounding Country. 

I have spent a busy summer. The change from law to poli- 
tics — & from Politicks to law — makes both pursuits very labor- 
ious. A man cannot do himself justice at either. Instead of 
preparing in the summer for winter I have often scarcely had 
time to read the common news of the day. Nothing but a belief, 
that it would have been deserting my post in the hour of danger, 
could have induced me again to become a candidate for Congress. 

J. Buchanan. 



FROM DUFF GREEN.^ 

Washington City 12th Oct. 1826. 

Dear Sir 

You will discover from the Journal & Telegraph that Mr. Clay & myself 
are at issue. The part taken by you on the occasion referred to, is known 
to me; and a due regard to your feelings has heretofore restrained me from 
using your name before the public. The time however is now approaching 
when it will become the duty of every man to do all in his power to expose 
the bargain which placed the Coalition in power. Will you, upon the receipt 
of this, write to me and explain the causes which induced you to see Genl. 
Jackson upon the subject of the vote of Mr. Clay & his friend a few days 
before it was known that they had conclusively determined to vote for Mr. 
Adams; also advise me of the manner in which you would prefer that subject 
to be brought before the people. 

Yours sincerely 

D. Green. 



Buchanan Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania. 



218 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

FROM GENERAL JACKSON/ 

Hermitage, Oct. 15, 1826. 

My Dear Sir: 

I was very much gratified on the receipt of your letter of the 21 st ult., 
which reached me yesterday, and thank you for the information it contains. 
I want language to express the gratitude I feel for the unsolicited, but 
generous support of the great Republican State of Pennsylvania — did I lack 
a stimulus to exert all my faculties to promote the best interests of my 
country, this alone would be sufficient. Who could abandon the path of 
Republican virtue when thus supported by the voluntary approbation of the 
enlightened and virtuous citizens of such a State as Pennsylvania? I answer, 
none whose minds have been matured in the schools of virtue, religion and 
morality. 

I am happy to learn that Mr. Clieves has become your neighbor and a 
citizen — he is a great blessing to any society — he has a well-stored mind of 
useful information, which he will employ to the benefit of his country and 
the happiness of the society to which he belongs. Please present me to him 
respectfully. 

I regret to learn that the drought has visited your section of country, 
and your crops are not abundant ; still, so long as we have a supply of bread- 
stufifs and other substantial, we ought to be thankful and happy. When we 
contrast our situation with Ireland and England, we ought to view ourselves 
as the chosen people of God, who has given us such a happy government of 
laws and placed us in such a climate and fertile soil. We ought not only to 
be thankful, but we ought to cherish and foster this heavenly boon with 
vestal vigilance. 

Mrs. J. joins me in kind salutations and respects to you. 
I am, very respectfully, your friend, 

Andrew Jackson. 



TO DUFF GREEN.2 

Lancaster i6th October 1826. 
Dear Sir, 

I confess I was somewhat surprised upon reading yours of 
the 1 2th Instant. My time since the adjournment of Congress 
has been so much occupied by professional and private business, 
and I have been so much absent from home, that I have bestowed 
but httle attention upon the Newspapers. I have not seen a single 



' Curtis's Buchanan, I. 48. 

' Jackson MSS., Library of Congress. The draft of this letter is among 
the Buchanan Papers in the Historical Society of Pennsylvania. An extract 
from the letter is printed in Niles' Weekly Register, Sept. 8, 1827; and in 
Colton's Life and Times of Henry Clay, I. 358. 



1826] TO DUFF GREEN 219 

number of the National Journal since I left Washington, and 
have only read the Telegraph occasionally when one of my friends 
who takes it, thought there was any thing remarkable in it and 
brought it to me for perusal. I requested you to have it for- 
warded to me and you mentioned you would send it with a sub- 
scription paper ; but neither the one nor the other has ever arrived. 
1 am therefore ignorant of the precise point on which Mr. Clay 
and yourself are at issue. 

You request me to write to you and explain the causes which 
induced me to see General Jackson, upon the subject of the vote 
of Mr. Clay and his friends, a few days before it was known that 
they had conclusively determined to vote for Mr. Adams; and 
also advise you of the manner in which I would prefer that sub- 
ject to be brought before the people. You also allege that the 
part taken by me on the occasion referred to is known to you. 

At this distance of time, I could not if I would, explain to 
you all the causes which induced me to hold, the only conversation 
which I ever held with General Jackson, on the subject of the 
Presidential election. It will be sufficient, however for vour 
purpose to know, that I had no authority from Mr. Clay or his 
friends to propose any terms to General Jackson, in relation to 
their votes, nor did I make any such proposition. I trust I would 
be as incapable of becoming a messenger upon such an occasion, 
as it is known General Jackson would be to receive such a 
message. 

I repeated the substance of this conversation to a few friends 
at Washington ; one of whom must have communicated it to you. 
That person whoever he may be is entirely mistaken in supposing, 
the subject of it to have been what you allege in your letter. I 
must therefore protest against bringing that conversation before 
the people, through the medium of the Telegraph or any other 
Newspaper. 

The facts are before the world that Mr. Clay and his par- 
ticular friends made Mr. Adams President ; and that Mr. Adams 
immediately thereafter made Mr. Clay Secretary of State. The 
people will draw their own inferences from such conduct and from 
the circumstances connected with it. They will judge of the 
cause from the effects. I am clearly of opinion that whoever shall 
attempt to prove by direct evidence any corrupt bargain between 
Mr. C. and Mr. A. will fail; for if it existed, the parties to it 
will forever conceal it from the light. Conversations partly in 
jest, and perhaps partly in earnest between members of Congress 



220 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1826 

upon terms of intimacy may be exhibited to the pubhc; but they 
will have no other effect, than to injure the party who may vio- 
late the sanctuary of private friendship and betray that confidence 
without which society could hardly exist. General Jackson re- 
quires not such aid, 

from your friend 

James Buchanan. 
General D. Green. 



REMARKS, DECEMBER 11, 1826, 

ON A PROPOSED GRANT OF LAND TO CERTAIN ASYLUMS 
FOR THE DEAF AND DUMB.> 

Mr, Buchanan thought it manifest, from the observations of 
the gentleman from Vermont, that he had not examined this bill 
with his usual accuracy. For himself, Mr. B. said, he would 
never vote to give a corporation land in a Territory, with power to 
hold it an indefinite length of time : it would be unjust and im- 
proper. But no such power is granted by the bill. They must 
sell the land within five years. They cannot lease it; or, if they 
do, their lessees will become freeholders in a very short time. 
The objection, therefore, of the gentleman, did not apply. The 
simple question before the House is, shall these benevolent cor- 
porations be compelled to sell the donation of their Government 
immediately, at the very first sale of public lands; or, shall they 
be permitted to manage it for themselves, and sell, as policy may 
dictate, at any time within five years? If the House intended to 
make a grant to these schools, on the same terms as they had 
already done to other Institutions of a similar kind, in other 
States, they would pass the bill as it stands : but if the lands are 
to be exposed to a compulsory sale, the inevitable consequence 
would be, that they must be sacrificed. Every body could tell w^hat 
was likely to be the fate of a tract of land, set up, with a knowl- 
edge, by all parties, that it must be sold within a fixed time, bring 
what it might; and this in a distant Territory, among persons 
strangers to the Institutions concerned, and feeling not the least 
concern or interest about them. They would go to speculators, 
and would not bring more than the minimum price allow-ed by law\ 
The bill does not prevent Florida from saying that no land within 



^ Register of Debates, 19 Cong. 2 Sess. 1826-1827, III. 527. 



1827] IMPORTATION OF BRANDY 221 

that Territory shall be held in mortmain. These lands must be 
disposed of in five years ; but, if that period is thought too long, 
let it be curtailed ; but do not compel your beneficiaries to sacrifice 
the gift you bestow. 



RESOLUTION, DECEMBER 14, 1826, 

CALLING FOR INFORMATION ON THE PANAMA CONGRESS.' 

In the House of Representatives, Thursday, December 14, 
1826, Mr. Buchanan laid the following resolution on the table for 
consideration, to wit : 

1. Resolved, That the president of the United States be re- 
quested to furnish this house any information in his possession, 
which, in his opinion, may be communicated without detriment 
to the public service, concerning the nature of the stipulations 
contained in the treaty of league and perpetual friendship, and the 
convention respecting contingents and compact, which were con- 
cluded and signed at Panama, on the 1 5th July last. 

2. Resolved, That the president of the United States be 
requested to communicate to this house any information in his 
possession, relative to the organization, proceedings, and adjourn- 
ment of the congress lately held at Panama which, in his opinion, 
may be communicated without detriment to the public interest. 

The resolution was agreed to the next day. 



1827. 
REMARKS, JANUARY 3, 1827, 

ON THE IMPORTATION OF BRANDY IN SMALL CASKS. - 

The engrossed bill to authorize the importation of brandy in 
casks of a capacity not less than fifteen gallons, and the exporta- 
tion thereof with benefit of drawback, was read the third time; 
and the question being, " Shall the bill pass? " 

^Ir. Buchanan rose, and said, the interests which my con- 
stituents have in this bill, and the relation in which I stand 
towards it, compel me to make a few observations in opposition 
to its passage. 

' Niles' Weekly Register, Dec. 23, 1826, XXI. 263. 

"Register of Debates, 19 Cong. 2 Sess. 1826-1827. III. 588-591. 596-597- 



222 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

Mr. B. said, the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Barney] 
has stated the question truly. It is a question between brandy 
and whiskey — between the commercial and the agricultural inter- 
ests of the country. Whenever such a question arises in this 
House, as a Representative more peculiarly of the agricultural 
interest, I always dread the result. What is the nature of this 
bill? The laws at present in existence authorize the importation 
of foreign brandy into the United States in casks of ninety gallons 
and upwards. They equally authorize its exportation in casks 
of the same description, to foreign countries, and allow a draw- 
back of the duties in favor of the exporting merchant. Every 
port in the United States is for this purpose a free port. The 
merchants are allowed one year for the exportation of every 
kind of foreign spirits, with the benefit of a drawback of the 
duties. What, then, is the object of this bill? Merely to allow 
its importation and exportation, upon the same terms, in casks 
of fifteen gallons. What is the difference? Consider it as you 
will, it is only the difference of value in the foreign market, be- 
tween one cask containing ninety gallons, and six casks containing 
each fifteen gallons. This can be the only result, if the object of 
the bill be honest. The gentleman from Maryland, [Mr. Barney,] 
has, however, informed the House — and I believe his information 
to be correct — that Mexico has excluded Spanish brandy, and 
the practice is, to carry the article there without marks, and the 
People know it by the taste. What, then, becomes of the argu- 
ment in favor of this bill? We have been told, over and over 
again, that the Mexicans would not buy the brandy, unless it was 
imported in the original casks from Spain ; and that the casks 
which contained it must be small, that they might be transported 
over the mountains on the backs of mules. We are now informed 
that the article must be taken to Mexico without marks, so that 
the revenue laws of that sister Republic may be violated, and the 
article be illegally introduced into consumption. Is this an object 
worthy of our legislation? The gentleman says they know the 
article to be genuine by the taste. Then might it not as well, and 
better, be put into small casks in Mexico than in Spain? Are 
you determined to pass a law to enable the merchants to evade 
the revenue laws of Mexico? Are you about to force an article 
into that country which they have prohibited ? If this be not the 
object, what is it? What can be the reason of the extreme interest 
felt in this bill? Why has the American mercantile world been put 
in motion to accomplish a purpose so trifling? The answer is, that 



1827] IMPORTATION OF BRANDY 223 

the merchants are a united body — they move in a soHd phalanx — - 
they meet daily at their coffee-houses in our large cities — they 
are represented by Chambers of Commerce, and whenever they 
act, they act with concert. Every thing which regards them is 
magnified into importance, and they are successful in this House 
in almost every cause in which they embark. On the other hand, 
the farmers, upon whom this bill must and will operate injur- 
iously, are scattered over an immense extent of country, and 
rarely act in concert, unless upon great occasions. They gen- 
erously confide their interests to their Representatives and to 
Heaven. The Representatives of the merchants upon this floor 
are always united and alive to the commercial interest. We have 
already heard upon this subject the Representatives of all the large 
commercial cities of the Union, except New Orleans ; and, said Mr, 
B. that gentleman is at this moment taking notes, and preparing 
to speak. The real question for our consideration then, is. Would 
not the trifling advantage which this bill proposes in favor of the 
merchants be purchased at too high a price? Would not the 
injury to the revenue, and to the agricultural interest, far more 
than counterbalance it? Mr. B. said he would make a few re- 
marks on each of these topics. Then, as to the revenue, when the 
first law was passed upon this subject, in 1790, spirits were al- 
lowed to be imported in casks of any capacity. Nine years experi- 
ence taught us the necessity of limiting the importation to casks 
containing at least ninety gallons. Such is the existing law of 
1799. Would this alteration have ever been made, if experience 
had not proclaimed its necessity ? Would a distinction have been 
made between brandy and wine, without reason? The truth is, 
that the danger of smuggling wine is not at all the same as 
that of smuggling brandy. Those who purchase and drink wine 
are not generally such people as would buy from a smuggler. 
The smuggling of spirits has been a business in every country. 
The experience of England proves that all the guards which can^ 
be interposed are not sufficient to prevent it. By this bill you 
throw wide open the whole coast of the United States to smug- 
glers, and invite them to defraud your revenue, by permitting the 
importation of small casks of fifteen gallons. Had the amend- 
ment of the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Wright] prevailed, this 
objection would, in a considerable degree, have been destroyed. 
One of the most respectable merchants in the United States has 
informed me, that Spanish brandy is of a quality entirely unsuited 
for the consumption of this country— that it is quite white, almost 



224 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

as strong as aqua fortis, and of a very disagreeable taste. Had 
permission been granted to import brandy in small casks for the 
purpose of exportation, and no other, (and this was all the mer- 
chants asked,) none would have been imported except what was 
intended for the South American market. In that case there 
could have been comparatively but little danger of smuggling; 
because no person would have used the article after it had been 
smuggled. This bill, as it now stands, opens our whole sea coast 
to the introduction of every kind of spirits in small casks, as well 
for home consumption as for foreign exportation. 

In opposition to that amendment, it was asked by the gentle- 
men from Delaware and Massachusetts, [Mr. McLane and Mr. 
Webster,] what would become of these small casks of brandy after 
the year within which they might be exported had expired, if they 
were not permitted to go into the consumption of the country? 
I answer, the merchants who placed them in the warehouses would 
take care to dispose of them within the year. They would either 
export them or sell them to others who would. Neither is this a 
new thing in commerce. The warehousing system of Great 
Britain proceeds upon the same principle. They admit the im- 
portation of our flour for export — but do not suffer it to be intro- 
duced into home consumption. The gentleman from Massachu- 
setts referred to Great Britain, and the amendment of the gentle- 
man from Ohio [Mr. Wright] proposed nothing but what had 
been sanctioned by the experience of that country. 

What will be the effect of this bill on the agricultural inter- 
est? It will necessarily enlist upon the side of Spanish brandy 
all the skill and enterprise of our merchants in the South Amer- 
ican markets, against our domestic article, whiskey. What is the 
nature of the drawback system, as applied to these articles ? We 
have already established public warehouses, in which every kind 
of foreign spirits are deposited by the merchants, for the purpose 
of transporting them to South America. We have granted a 
drawback of the duties upon their exportation. In truth, these 
warehouses are magazines, established by ourselves, in which the 
merchants can deposit immense stores of foreign spirits, to be 
sent abroad over the world, and to go into competition with our 
own whiskey. I do not at present propose to curtail this system, 
though I might do it in this particular with great reason: all I 
ask is, that it shall not be extended. The merchants ask for still 
greater facilities ; but, in my opinion, here we ought to stop for 
the present. 



1827] IMPORTATION OF BRANDY 225 

I have now in my possession, said Mr, B. a letter from an 
extensive refiner of domestic spirits in Baltimore, whose high 
character is well known to the Representative from that city, pro- 
testing against the passage of this bill. He says that the mer- 
chants at present export to South America whiskey in small 
casks, to suit those markets, and that it is taking the place of 
Spanish brandy. Pass this bill, and you at once check that trade. 
This is not a contest in which the distillers are chiefly interested. 
For several years the price of flour has been so low as scarcely to 
repay the labor of the farmer in the cultivation of wheat. The 
corn and rye of the Middle and Western States would not pay 
the price of transportation to market, unless it assumed the form 
of whiskey. Moralists may regret that so much of this article 
is used ; for one, I sincerely do ; but if any kind of spirits must be 
used, it is better to encourage our own farmers than the foreign 
producers of the article. Whiskey is, in every respect, a better 
article than the vile truck called Spanish brandy ; and if it be made 
the interest of our merchants to introduce its use in foreign 
countries, it must soon gain the preference. 

This is no time to cripple the farmer. Our direct trade 
with the British colonies is destroyed. We thus lose one of our 
best markets for flour. The farmer may again be called upon to 
agree not to sell his flour to British colonial purchasers, unless 
their Government will suffer it to be carried in American vessels. 
If the interest of the country should require this sacrifice, the 
farmer will again be willing to make it, provided you act upon 
the principle of Washington, and first place your adversary in the 
wrong. The merchants ought not, at this time, to wish for so 
trifling an advantage, when it is calculated so essentially to injure 
the grain-growing States. If the time should ever come when 
the mercantile interest shall need support, I shall be found its 
friend. I know the importance of a commercial marine ; I know 
it is the foundation of our Navy ; and I shall always be willing to 
give it a fair support, unless their demand is, as I believe it to be 
upon the present occasion, unreasonable and improper. 

Mr. B. said he had discharged his duty, he feared without 
effect. He apprehended, from the great and concentrated force 
of the mercantile interest in this House, the bill would pass. 

He********* 

Mr. Buchanan said, he felt himself reluctantly constrained, 
from the number of speakers who had replied to him, and from 
15 



226 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

the style of their arguments, again to obtrude himself upon the 
House. If, said Mr. B. I were compelled to choose a dictator, 
whose assertion I must take for argument, the gentleman from 
Louisiana [Mr. Livingston] might be one of the number in this 
House from whom I would make a selection. He must, however, 
permit me to represent my own constituents according to my 
own judgment. He has stated in substance, that I am entirely 
ignorant of the true interest of the agriculturists whom I repre- 
sent; and it would be a most important advantage to them to 
encourage the exportation of Spanish brandy to South America. 
We must take this upon faith : for certainly he has not attempted 
to prove it. 

[Here Mr. Livingston explained in a complimentary manner 
to Mr. B. and denied that he intended any such imputation.] 

Has the gentleman from Louisiana shown wherein I have 
been mistaken ? No gentleman can shut his eyes against the true 
state of the case. It is true there has been an endeavor to conceal 
it under a mass of irrelevant matter. We do not intend to pro- 
hibit the exportation of brandy to South America. We ask no 
change in the existing law ; although the competition against our 
whiskey is already too great. The question is, Shall we make it 
greater? Shall we injure our farmers still more? Shall we 
grant an additional bounty in favor of foreign spirits, by permit- 
ting the article to be imported and exported in smaller casks than 
the law at present allows? This change, whilst it will injure the 
farmers much, cannot be of great importance to the merchants. 

Gentlemen have referred to the policy and the practice of the 
British Government. Although in March, 1825, Mr. Huskisson 
recommended a -reduction of the duties upon the importation into 
Great Britain of cotton and linen goods to such a standard as 
would make them protecting instead of prohibitory, yet he had too 
much regard for the domestic industry of his own country, to 
allow these foreign manufactures any benefit of drawback upon 
exportation. He was willing they should come into competition 
with domestic manufactures in the domestic market; but would 
not send them into competition in foreign markets with the manu- 
factures of England. We have acted upon the same principle in 
regard to a few articles. For the purpose of protecting our 
fisheries — and I admit that this is an interest well worthy of 
protection — we have denied the benefit of drawback to foreign 
dried and pickled fish and fish oil. We have also denied it to 
salted provisions. No foreign articles of this description can be 



1827] IMPORTATION OF BRANDY 227 

carried from the United States into foreign markets to interfere 
with domestic articles of the same description. Why should not 
this be the case with respect to foreign spirits? But we do not 
ask it; we only protest against extending the principle of draw- 
back further than it at present exists. It is the policy of this 
country, I admit, to foster and protect its commerce by every 
method which shall not directly interfere with its other great inter- 
ests. They should all move on in harmony. Our navigation 
ought not to be used for the purpose of destroying either our 
agriculture or manufactures. 

I have a word to say in reply to the gentleman from Massa- 
chusetts, [Mr. Everett.] He has asserted that the British are 
obtaining great advantages over us in the South American mar- 
kets. In this the gentleman must be mistaken. Mr. B. said, he 
had looked into the documents as well as the gentleman from 
New York, [Mr. Wood.] They exhibited a very cheering view 
in this particular. Our trade with that portion of the world 
was rapidly increasing. Our exportation to those regions, even 
of manufactured articles, had already become very considerable. 
Our manufactures of cotton, particularly those of a coarser qual- 
ity, were, throughout South America, preferred to British manu- 
factures. Our navigation was also rapidly increasing, and the 
trade was certainly prosperous. Our exportation of whiskey to 
those countries is already considerable, and has been increasing. 
I fear, however, that this bill will have a tendency greatly to 
injure our trade in that article. This bill will establish a dan- 
gerous precedent. I would not be astonished, if it should pass, 
to hear it argued upon this floor, that it would be of advantage to 
the growers of hemp in this country to allow the prayer of the 
petition from Massachusetts, and grant a drawback upon the ex- 
portation of cordage manufactured out of foreign hemp ; or that, 
in compliance with another request, from Rhode Island, it would 
be greatly for the benefit of our wool-growers to reduce the duty 
upon foreign wool. 

The gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. Everett] has in- 
formed us that, even if the ports of Mexico are closed by law 
against Spanish brandy, yet still, in fact, it is a common article of 
commerce in that country. If it be so, it must either be by the 
fraud or neglect of the custom house officers. The trade is illicit, 
and we should do no act to render it more extensive. If you do, 
you combine with our merchants, and assist them still more exten- 
sively to carry on a trade prohibited by the policy of a sister 
Republic. 



228 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

REMARKS, JANUARY 9, 1827, 

ON THE APPOINTMENT OF CHARGES D'AFFAIRES.^ 

Mr. Buchanan said, since the gentleman from Tennessee had 
consented to accept the modification proposed by the gentleman 
from Massachusetts, he cared very little whether the resolution 
passed or not. It had become so extensive, that the object of it 
would be defeated. Mr. B. said he had understood the gentleman 
from Tennessee to make a distinct charge — if he did not, Mr. B. 
wished him to say so — that not only had a Minister of the United 
States abroad appointed a Charge des Affaires on his leaving the 
station, (which appointment Mr. B. admitted was necessary and 
proper,) but that that Charge, besides receiving the salary at- 
tached to that office, during the time he held it, had received an 
outfit. He knew not whether he was correct in this impression ; 
but, if he was wrong, he hoped the gentleman would correct him. 
But, if the gentleman had received such information as this, and 
the information was true, no practice whatever could make it a 
correct proceeding. Previous practice might justify the appoint- 
ment of a Charge des Affaires, and the allowance of a salary to 
him; but it could never justify an expenditure from the contingent 
fund for allowing him an outfit, in addition to the salary. This 
distinct fact had been proposed to be inquired into; but, by the 
amendment moved by the gentleman from Massachusetts, and 
accepted by the gentleman from Tennessee, that single point would 
be smothered under a mass of documents, which, if received within 
any reasonable time, would be entirely useless. Mr. B. added 
another remark : If the salary of our Ministers abroad was so low 
as to make it necessary for them to return to the country, annually, 
to receive an outfit to enable them to appear in a manner becoming 
our representatives at foreign Governments, that salary ought to 
be increased. If it was not so, the practice of changing our Min- 
isters abroad every year, could not be justified. It was a prac- 
tice which must be essentially injurious to the interests of the 
country: for, if a negotiation was opened abroad, the Minister 
often returned before it was completed, leaving the matter unset- 
tled, greatly to the detriment of our interest. Mr. B. concluded 
by saying, that he had no particular objection to the resolution : 
but he suggested to the gentleman from Tennessee, whether, 
clogged as it now was, he had not better abandon the resolution 



'Register of Debates, 19 Cong. 2 Sess. 1826-1827, III. 639, 640. 



1827] REVOLUTIONARY OFFICERS 229 

altogether, and on another day bring in a new resolution, confined 
to the object which he had specially in view. 

j^jZ >fi. ^ ^ ^ ^ y^ ^^ ^ ifi 

Mr. Everett said, that one remark of the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania was, that the amendment which has been adopted 
would have the effect to smother the object of the mover. What- 
ever may be the effect of it, [said Mr. E.] such was not my 
design in moving it. 

Mr. Buchanan explained. The gentleman from Massachu- 
setts, he said, was one of the last gentlemen in this House to 
whom he should ever think of imputing an intention to do any 
thing unfair. 



REMARKS, JANUARY 12, 1827, 

ON THE BILL FOR THE RELIEF OF REVOLUTIONARY OFFICERS. ' 

Mr. Buchanan said, it is not my intention to make a Speech 
upon the present occasion. I wish merely to present some views 
of the subject, which will occupy the attention of the House but 
for a few minutes. The friends of this bill ought to know, and 
ought to feel, that this is the very crisis of its fate ; and that, if the 
motion of the gentleman from South Carolina should prevail, all 
is lost. The House will then have finally decided against the 
claim of the relics of the Revolutionary army. 

Whatever may have been the intention of the mover of the 
re-commitment, its effect, its certain effect, will be, to defeat the 
bill, if it should prove successful. This motion has been supported 
by the most extraordinary and most inconsistent arguments. 
Gentlemen opposed to the bill, deny our right to make any such 
appropriation as it proposes; and, in the very same breath, assert, 
that they cannot support it, unless its provisions should be made 
much more extensive, and embrace all the militia who were in 
service during the Revolutionary War. 

Sir, said Mr. B. has it ever been the practice of this Govern- 
ment to provide for the militia? Are they before you, asking for 
any such provision ? The wealth of Crassus would have been as 
that of a beggar — ^the riches of Plutus would have been exhausted, 
in pensioning all the militia who served during the war of Inde- 
pendence. I feel as much gratitude to them for their services, as 



'Register of Debates, 19 Cong. 2 Sess. 1826-1827, III. 683-686. 



230 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

any man. A recollection of their glorious achievements must 
warm the breast of every patriot. They have given renown to 
their country ; but their occasional service of a few months, does 
not, cannot, place them upon an equality with the soldiers, who 
fought, and suffered, and bled, for years, in the sacred cause of 
liberty. The regular soldier was continually subject to martial 
law — he was compelled to remain in the service — Summer and 
Winter — and, as the gentleman from Rhode Island had eloquently 
said, he had marked the frozen soil of his country with the blood 
which flowed from his unshod feet. 

The States, during the period of the Revolutionary war, 
were each separate and independent. They were bound together 
by no tie but that of devotion to the cause in which they were all 
engaged. The militia were peculiarly the troops of the States — 
not the Army of the Continent. It had been left to the States to 
provide for them, whilst this Government provided for the sol- 
diers of the Continental Army. As a Pennsylvanian, said Mr. B. 
I am proud to declare, that my native State has not only been more 
liberal and more just, than any State in the Union, towards the 
regular officers and soldiers of her own line, upon the Continental 
establishment, but she has also acted in the same manner towards 
her militia. She has never refused to grant them pensions, if 
they were in want, and needed the assistance of their country. As 
one of the Representatives of that State, I claim no provision for 
the militia. They have claimed none for themselves ; they never 
would claim it for the purpose of depriving the regular soldiers 
of that pittance to which they are entitled from the justice and 
the gratitude of their country. By such means, they never would 
desire the present bill to be defeated. 

Among whom is the sum of $1,200,000, appropriated by this 
bill, to be distributed? There are many surviving officers and 
soldiers of the Revolution, who are in absolute w^ant, and who 
yet retain so much of their ancient military pride, that they have 
never disclosed their distress to the Government. Before they can 
obtain a pension, they must proclaim to the world they are beg- 
gars. This is our law. They must prove they are in extreme 
want, before they can ask relief ; and then it is doled out to them 
as charity. The sum of 1,200,000 dollars will be distributed 
among those, and those only, who have never obtained pensions. 
What will then be the pittance to each ? From the best calcula- 
tion, there are about 5515 such persons now living, and the aver- 
age portion of each would amount to but little more than two 
hundred dollars. Does the gentleman from South Carolina really 



1827] REVOLUTIONARY OFFICERS 231 

intend to engraft upon this sum, all the militia from Georgia to 
Maine, who ever served in the Revolutionary war ? all those, who, 
urged by a patriotic impulse and by impending danger, at any 
time during our long struggle, took the field, for a few months, to 
serve their country? This provision, instead of two hundred, 
would not be twenty dollars, for each man. I am bound to be- 
lieve, I do believe, it is not the intention of the gentleman from 
South Carolina to defeat this bill unfairly; but every member 
of this House must see, that, should the amendment prevail, the 
boon bestowed will not be worth accepting. Should it succeed, it 
would afford no relief to the objects of our bounty, unless millions 
were added to the appropriation. Upon this vote depends the 
fate of the bill : it cannot pass, if it should be re-committed with 
the proposed instructions. 

Mr. B. said, I will not enter into the constitutional objection 
to this bill which has been raised by the gentleman from South 
Carolina, [Mr. Alitchell.] I am myself no very liberal expounder 
of the Constitution. But a Government which holds the power 
of war — whose duty it is to defend the country against foreign 
and domestic foes — without the power of rewarding its own 
soldiers, is not a Government under whose dominion I should 
choose to live. Most assuredly such is not the Government of 
this country. 

There is another palpable inconsistency in the arguments of 
gentlemen. Whilst they deny that we ought to make any pro- 
vision for the surviving officers embraced by the first section of 
the bill — and for the widows of those who have departed — they 
object that the provision is not sufficiently extensive, because it 
does not also embrace their children and legal representatives. 
In regard to these officers, I shall admit, for the sake of the argu- 
ment, and for that only, that we do not owe them a debt, in the 
strict sense of the word. Although gentlemen have affirmed, that 
they were bound by the compromise into which they entered; 
yet no one has asserted, that, by that compromise, they received 
all to which they were fairly entitled. The terms were dictated by 
the poverty of the country: they were accepted by the patriot- 
ism of the officers. Is there then no distinction, as the gentle- 
man from South Carolina, [Mr. IMitchell,] has contended, between 
the living officers and the legal representatives of those who 
are dead) He has asked, why not provide for the children of 
the dead, in the same manner that you do for the survivors? T 
shall answer this question. If this claim be what gentlemen con- 
tend it is — a claim upon our gratitude, and not upon our justice — 



232 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

the distinction is clear as light. It is equally contrary to the prin- 
ciples and to the practice of this Government, to extend our 
bounty to those who did not render services — to make donations 
to the children for the sake of their fathers. It would establish 
a dangerous precedent, and one at war with our republican insti- 
tutions. But do these children ask this bounty at your hands? 
Are their petitions before you? Has any child of a Revolu- 
tionary sire — any man in whose veins the blood of a Revolution- 
ary officer flow^s — besought you for this boon? Is it, then, from 
a feeling of kindness to the children, that gentlemen, without 
solicitation, would bestow the bounty of the Government upon 
them? Or is it not for the purpose of destroying this bill, and 
defeating the claims of the aged officers and widows who are 
now asking you for relief? These children are rich in the fame 
of their fathers; they are comparatively young, and are able to 
make their way through life. They never have, and I trust they 
never will, interpose their claims to defeat those of the surviving 
officers of the Revolution. 

Who are before you asking for relief? They are the rem- 
nants of that band who achieved your independence. They are 
now suffering the evils both of age and of poverty. They have 
lived so long as to be forgotten ; it would seem they have become 
pilgrims and sojourners in the land. The beautiful and bountiful 
feast which they have purchased for the American People, with 
their sufferings and with their blood, is open to all but to them. 
The few veterans who have survived their generation again ask — 
what they have hitherto asked in vain — relief from their country. 
This has never hitherto been granted ; nay, more, we have refused 
to make any direct decision upon their claims. Let us not shrink 
from meeting the case fairly: let them know their fate. 

One word more, as to General Hampton and the other two 
wealthy officers, whose names have been introducd into this de- 
bate. Will the House deny justice to 444 individuals, merely 
because three of them do not need assistance? Said Mr. B., I 
have this moment been informed by a gentleman from South 
Carolina, [Mr. Drayton,] that Gen. Hampton will not be entitled 
to receive any thing under this bill. He was a State, and not a 
Continental officer. So far, then, from providing for him, he will 
gain no lienefit from the bill, unless the motion of the gentleman 
from South Carolina should prevail, and the militia be included; 
and in that event a pittance may be taken from some poor soldier, 
and bestowed upon this rich man. I do not intend to trouble 



1827] DUTIES ON WOOL 233 

the House further. I shall conclude with a single observation. 
The friends of the bill cannot help seeing and knowing, that, if it 
should be re-committed, the hopes of the Revolutionary officers 
are gone, and they may despair of any future effort for their 
relief, during the present session. 



REMARKS, JANUARY 18, 1827, 

ON THE DUTIES ON WOOL AND WOOLLENS.' 

Mr. Buchanan said, he rose for the purpose of making a 
motion, the fate of which would decide whether a majority of 
the House believed it was possible to act finally, during the pres- 
ent session, upon the bill making alterations in the acts imposing 
duties on imports. 

It is now little more than six weeks until the close of the 
session, and every gentleman can decide for himself, whether there 
is a prospect, within that period, of doing any thing efficient upon 
the subject. It is of importance that this question should be 
speedily decided. Throughout the country, some would enter- 
tain hopes, and others fears, respecting the result, which will 
give birth to ruinous speculations. The public mind should be 
quieted, as speedily as possible, if there be no reasonable hope 
that the measure can be finally decided. 

Mr, B. said, his opinions upon the subject of the tariff had 
undergone no change. He was as decidedly friendly as he ever 
had been to the policy of sustaining our domestic industry, by 
protecting duties. When the proper time should arrive, he would 
manifest this friendship in the proper manner. He concluded by 
moving that the Committee of the Whole on the state of the 
Union should be discharged from the further consideration of the 
bill ; and, if that motion should succeed, he avowed his intention 
of moving to lay the bill upon the table. 

Mr. Buchanan, in reply to the remarks of Messrs. Mallary 
and Mercer, said, I can assure gentlemen, I have no object ui 
view, but to ascertain whether the House believe it to be possible, 
during the present session, to mature and to pass a bill for the 
purpose of changing the existing tariff. Can any gentleman in 
this House recollect, that a tariff bill ever passed during a short 



' Register of Debates, 19 Cong. 2 Sess. 1826-1827, III. 747-748, 749- 



234 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

session, when our time is necessarily limited ? In my experience, 
every such effort has failed. It is a subject which, from its 
nature, will produce, and ought to produce, an extended debate. 
We have now but six weeks left, within which we can act upon 
this subject; there are many other bills of great importance, 
which, in the mean time, must be decided. In my opinion, if it 
be not physically, it is morally impossible. The motion which 
I have made, will ascertain what are the sentiments of the House. 

The gentleman from Vermont, [Mr. Mallary,] has said, 
that the woollen interest alone has complained, by petition, and 
asked for relief. On this subject, I will remark, as I did some 
weeks ago, that the agricultural interest, rarely, if ever, complain. 
Unlike the commercial and manufacturing interests, they have 
but little opportunity of combination. They trust their cause to 
their Representatives. As one of their Representatives, I com- 
plain for them. The Navy of the United States is at this time 
supplied with hemp from Russia, whilst that produced in the 
State of Pennsylvania, is without a market, although when water- 
rotted, it is equal to the best Russia hemp. Although I feel 
friendly to the protection of the woollen manufacture, can I ever, 
as a Representative of that State, agree to protect this interest, 
which chiefly exists in another portion of the Union, and leave 
the article of hemp unprotected? The price of grain has, for 
several years, been so low, as scarcely to afford the farmer who 
raises it, a bare subsistence. Shall it not also be protected by an 
increased duty on the importation of foreign spirits? The truth 
is, a new tariff always has been, always must be, a matter of 
compromise. The great interests of the country must proceed 
hand in hand. It would be unjust to separate them. I cannot, 
therefore, at this time, consent to any tariff which will protect 
the woollen manufacture, and that alone. 

If the House should decide that they will further consider 
the subject, during the present session, I shall prepare and oft'er 
amendments embracing these objects. 

I have always been, and believe I ever shall be, the decided 
friend of domestic manufactures. The duties, however, which 
we impose, should be protecting merely, not prohibitory. They 
should only enable the domestic manufacturer to sustain a fair 
competition in the domestic market. Such duties produce their 
effect gradually, not suddenly. The increase of price is so tri- 
fling, as scarcely to be felt by the consumer. But, establish a duty 
which will at once be prohibitory on woollen manufactures, on 



1827] DUTIES ON WOOL 235 

articles essential to the comfort of your farmers, and all other 
classes of your People; suddenly increase their price in such a 
manner, as to be severely felt, and to destroy a principal source 
of your revenue ; and there will be danger of a re-action destruc- 
tive to domestic manufactures. The present bill, in my opinion, 
goes too far. If it should be taken up for consideration, I shall 
endeavor to have it amended in this, and in other respects, and 
if I should be successful, it shall then have my cordial support. 
The discussion of it at the present period of the session, appears 
to me to be a useless waste of precious time. 



REMARKS, JANUARY 22, 1827, 

ON THE DUTIES ON WOOL AND WOOLLENS.' 

Mr. Buchanan said, I should have waived the privilege which 
is usually extended by the courtesy of the House to the mover of 
a proposition, of closing the debate, if it were not for a single 
circumstance. I did not hear the remark of my friend from 
Virginia [Mr. Mercer] on Thursday last, which imputed igno- 
rance of his duty to a former Chairman of the Committee of 
Domestic Manufactures, who was a member of this House from 
the State which I have, in part, the honor to represent. For what 
cause has this charge been made against that gentleman? It is 
not because he was ignorant either of our foreign or our domestic 
trade : not because he was unacquainted with the countries from 
which foreign iron was imported, and its cost, both to the foreign 
and to the domestic manufacturer; but simply because he had for- 
gotten, or, perhaps, never had known, the name of an obscure 
town in Wales, from which that article was imported. I must 
confess I do not remember the name myself. The gentlemen 
around me now inform me it is Cardiff. The truth is, that 
gentleman had enjoyed singular good fortune during the short 
period which he remained in Congress; but not better than he 
deserved. To him, more than to any other individual in this 
nation, are we indebted for the tariff of 1824 — a tariff which has 
been so mild and so gradual in its operation, as not to have bur- 
dened the community, and yet so powerful as to have generally 
afforded efficient protection to our domestic industry. It was a 
tariff of protection, not of prohibition. That gentleman had 
labored upon it incessantly for the whole of two sessions ; and yet 



' Register of Debates, 19 Cong. 2 Sess. 1826-1827, III. 779-780. 



236 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

we are now called upon, during the few remaining weeks of this 
session, to mature, to pass a new bill upon this subject. Gentle- 
men, although they have not directly charged me with incon- 
sistency, yet such a charge is fairly to be implied from their 
remarks. Can any person really believe that, because I supported 
protection in 1824, I am bound to advocate prohibition in 1827? 
Did my course then, compel me now, in order to be consistent, to 
vote for any crude and undigested measure which may be pro- 
posed, merely because it is called a tariff? Certainly not. This 
bill, should it become a law, will effectually prohibit the importa- 
tion of nearly all the woollen goods in common use, whose value, 
at the place of exportation, shall not exceed three dollars and 
fifty cents per yard. It embraces peculiarly within its grasp, 
those articles worn by the poor and middle classes of society. 
Its provisions extend far beyond the request of the woollen manu- 
facturers. They have not alleged that the duty of thirty-three 
and one-third per cent, was insufficient for their protection; but 
they complain, and I believe with justice, that British manufac- 
facturers and British agents fraudulently evade the payment of 
this duty. What, then, is the proper remedy? A measure 
which would prevent the fraud, and give fair effect to the tariff 
of 1824. Instead of that, we are now presented with a bill which 
closes the door altogether against foreign competition. This 
is the application of salivation and blistering to cure the headache. 
The remedy is entirely too violent for the disease. If the bill had 
proposed a moderate minimum, and had made a small addition to 
the ad valorem duty, it should have received my support. In its 
present shape, however, I could not vote for it, even if it em- 
braced a provision to impose additional duties on the importation 
of foreign spirits and of hemp. Sir, said Mr. B., I wish to put 
the question seriously to every member within the sound of my 
voice, whether they believe it possible to mature and to pass a 
proper bill upon the subject during the present session? If the 
House should make the attempt, I feel positive that my course 
will be proved to be correct. After wasting much precious time 
in the discussion, and after dividing the friends of domestic manu- 
factures themselves, the bill will eventually be postponed until 
the next session. I am sorry that I am compelled to make these 
observations, but self-preservation is the first law of nature. As 
a Representative of Pennsylvania, as a friend to the tariff, and 
feeling a deep interest in its popularity. I can never look on with 
indifference at the passage of a bill which will at once prohibit 



1827] INDEMNITY FOR SLAVES 237 

the importation of foreign woollens; much less can I do so when 
that bill contains no provisions calculated to protect the suffering 
domestic industry of my own State. 



FROM GENERAL JACKSON.' 

Hermitage Janry 29th 1827. 
Dr Sir 

Your favour of the 19th has been before me for some time, but observing 
in the papers the obituary notice of your brother whose illness took you from 
the city, I have delayed acknowledging its receipt until advised of your 
return. I pray you to accept my sincere condolence for the serious loss you 
have sustained in the death of your brother. 

I suspect the administration begins to perceive the necessity of public 
confidence, without which it is an arduous undertaking to execute the solemn 
duties confided by the constitution to the chief magistrate. The Panama 
" bubble " & the loss of the trade with the British West Indies are the 
result of this defect in the Cabinet, for it cannot be supposed that such reputed 
diplomatists would have committed errors so obvious had not some influence 
stronger than the public good operated upon their minds. My hope, however, 
is, that the wisdom of Congress may remedy these blunders, and that my 
friends the " factious opposition," may in your own language never forget 
the support due to the country. I had predicted from the movements of 
Seargeant and Rochester that the Panama subject was done with, and that 
the charge of factious opposition would be hushed, but it appears I was 
mistaken. Tecubaya is to be the Theatre on which these mighty projects 
are to be unfolded — alas, what folly and weakness. 

Present me to my friend Mr. Kremer & believe me very respectfully 

Yr. mo. obdt. servt. 

Andrew Jackson. 



REMARKS, JANUARY 31, 1827, 

ON A PROPOSED RESOLUTION OF INQUIRY AS TO A POSSIBLE RESIDUUM 
OF THE INDEMNITY FOR SLAVES UNLAWFULLY CARRIED AWAY. 2 

Mr. Buchanan said, that it was considered a usual act of 
courtesy, in that House, to pass every resolution whose object 

^Buchanan Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania. The letter is 
imperfectly printed in Curtis's Buchanan, I. 49. 

'Register of Debates, 19 Cong. 2 Sess. 1826-1827, III. 879-880. The 
indemnity above referred to is that which was paid by Great Britain under 
the convention of November 13, 1826, as compensation for slaves carried 
away from the United States by the British forces in violation of the treaty 
of Ghent. See Moore's History and Digest of International Arbitrations, I. 
350, 381- 



238 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

was a simple inquiry. Yet he felt himself unable to approve of 
that now offered. The House is already inundated with a press 
of business, which it will scarcely be able to get through with. 
A resolution is now offered, which says, in substance, that the 
Committee on Foreign Relations shall now make provision for 
the distribution of a certain residuum of money among a meri- 
torious class of persons, the very existence of which residuum 
cannot be ascertained for two years to come. The bill, to which 
the resolution refers, allows to the Commissioners, who are to be 
appointed under it, two years, for ascertaining whether any such 
residuum would be left, nor can it be ascertained within less time; 
yet the gentleman is so very provident, that he would set the 
committee to inquiring about the manner in which it is to be dis- 
tributed so long before. In his judgment, there was no probabil- 
ity that any such balance would be left at all. And where was 
the necessity of occupying the time of one of the committees of 
this House with an inquiry about it so long beforehand? If the 
gentleman would direct his resolution to the Secretary of State, 
and so modify it as to call for the acts or opinions of the Commis- 
sioners under the treaty of Ghent, he might readily become satis- 
fied, that there was no such probability. The resolution, in its 
present form, appeared to him to be very unnecessary ; but, as it 
proposed a mere inquiry, he should not oppose its passage. 



REMARKS, FEBRUARY 6, 1827, 

ON THE REFERENCE OF MEMORIALS IN BEHALF OF 
A POLAR EXPEDITION.! 

Mr. Buchanan said, he had not risen for the purpose of 
expressing any opinion with respect to the truth or falsehood of 
the speculations in these memorials. But the peculiar situation 
in which he stood toward some of the memorialists, rendered it 
proper for him to say a word on the subject. Some of the 
memorials were presented by men of as great respectability in the 
community, of as cool heads, and as far removed from any thing 
like enthusiasm, or credulity, as any that could be found. Tliey 
recommend not an expedition to Symmes' hole, (if there was 
such a place,) but an expedition of discovery in the high latitudes 
of both hemispheres. That was the subject of the prayer of 



^Register of Debates, 19 Cong. 2 Sess. 1826-1827, III. 949- 



1827] DUTIES ON WOOL 239 

these petitioners — a subject entirely distinct from the pecuHarities 
of any hypothesis. He hoped it would be referred to the Com- 
mittee on Naval Affairs — as, should any expedition be determined 
on, that would be the appropriate Committee through which the 
report ought to come. The Legislature of Maryland was among 
the petitioners on this subject. They had unanimously recom- 
mended the subject to the attention of Congress — other petitions 
came from various parts of the United States. He thought it 
was due to the character and standing of these memorialists, that 
proper attention should be paid to their application. For him- 
self, he professed to have formed no opinion on the subject of 
Symmes' Theory. There might be a hole at the poles for aught 
he knew; but however that might be, the expedition recom- 
mended was not for the purpose of finding it. 



REMARKS, FEBRUARY 7, 1827, 

ON THE DUTIES ON WOOL AND WOOLLENS.' 

Mr. Buchanan said, he did not rise to prevent the question 
from being taken upon the bill, that night. But, said Mr. B. if 
I could silently suffer it to pass, in its present shape, I should 
feel myself faithless to the high trust which has been reposed in 
me, as one of the Representatives of Pennsylvania. 

Sir, said Mr. B. if this bill had been confined to protection 
merely, I should have voted for it, even if I had believed that 
protection to be too great. No slight difference of opinion should 
have separated me from the friends of this bill. Under a system 
of protection, the woollen manufacture of my own State, yet 
in its infancy, would have gradually risen into importance. It 
would have taken deep root in our soil, and its growth would 
have been firm and steady. The wool-grower might then, by 
gradually extending his flocks, have kept pace with the manufac- 
turer, and have supplied him with the raw material. Agriculture 
and manufactures would thus have been united, and would have 
sustained each other. 

But what will be the case under the system now proposed? 
A system of prohibition in favor of the manufacturer; whilst it 
leaves the wool-grower with but little additional protection, and 
that little long deferred. Viewing the consequences which must 



' Register of Debates, ig Cong. 2 Sess. 1826-1827, III. 997-1000. 



240 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

necessarily result from this measure, and the spot which gave it 
birth, I believe it to be a mere Boston and Salem bill — a bill cal- 
culated to give the woollen manufacturers of a small District in 
New England, a monopoly of the market of the whole Union. 
If it should become a law, Pennsylvania will need a tariff against 
New England, as much as the United States now need a tariff 
against Old England. 

It has been said that 40,000,000 dollars of capital have been 
invested in the woollen manufacture. Where? Is it spread over 
the regions of the West? or in the Middle States? Certainly not. 
But a small portion of this capital, comparatively speaking, exists 
out of New England. Even there, the greater part of it is con- 
lined within a narrow space. Much of the immense capital of 
Boston and Salem has been diverted from commerce to the 
woollen manufacture. This branch of business is not there 
conducted by individuals, but large masses of wealth are con- 
centrated, and applied to that purpose, by incorporated companies. 
In this state of the manufacture, prohibit, at once, the importa- 
tion of foreign woollens, and what is the inevitable consequence? 
In the East, they are already in possession of the capital. They 
already have large incorporated companies in successful opera- 
tion. They can, at once, extend their machinery, to meet the 
increased demand arising from prohibition; and, in this manner, 
they can, and they will swallow up the woollen manufactures 
throughout the rest of the Union. We are not yet prepared to 
contend against them. Our woollen manufacturers cannot sus- 
tain such a competition. The skill and the capital of individuals 
in the Middle States, if this bill should become a law, must, and 
will be overwhelmed by the superior skill and superior capital 
of the Eastern manufacturing companies. Are you prepared to 
establish an Eastern monopoly? I trust the House will pause, 
and consider this matter. Is it not much better to increase the 
rate of the present ad valorem duty, and thus give additional 
protection to our manufactures, than to be hurried into a prohib- 
itory system, for which we are not prepared? — a system, too, 
so unjust, and so unequal in its operation, that, whilst it will levy 
an oppressive tax from the pockets of the poor, leaves the law 
as it now is, in regard to the rich. The principle of this bill, 
if principle it can be called, is, the lower the price between each 
of the minimums, the higher the ad valorem duty. The man 
whose coat costs four dollars the square yard, and upwards, will 
pay no additional tax. Thus you oppress the poor man, in pro- 



1827] DUTIES ON WOOL 241 

portion to his poverty, whilst you shield the wealthy from the 
operation of the law. 

Sir, said Mr. B. I feel sorry that I have been compelled, by 
a sense of duty, to speak as I have done, of the present bill. Its 
extraordinary nature must be my apology. Our former tariffs 
have been based upon broad principles of national policy. They 
have extended the blessings, as well as the burdens of the system, 
over the whole country. Every interest susceptible of protection, 
which was in a suffering condition, has been protected by them. 
In truth, our former tariff's have been a compromise among the 
various and extended interests of the Union. Such, in my opin- 
ion, should ever be the case. But what is the nature of this bill? 
It embraces a single article of manufactures, and seeks to establish 
a local monopoly in New England, in favor of the manufacturers 
of that article. Its friends have manifested no fellow feeling for 
other suffering interests of the country. My constituents are 
essentially agricultural. For several years, the price of grain has 
been so low% as scarcely to afford the farmer a comfortable sub- 
sistence. Although every good man must deplore the excessive 
use of spirits in which the People of this country indulge ; yet, it 
is the clearest dictate of policy, if the article must be used, that 
of domestic origin ought to be preferred. In proportion as you 
substitute the use of whiskey for foreign spirits, in the same 
proportion do you increase the demand, and the price for the 
grain of the farmer. The distilling interest is, therefore, one of 
great importance to the State of Pennsylvania, and one in which 
she has, and she feels, a deep interest. Under these impressions, 
I confess I was utterly astonished to find that not one Repre- 
sentative from New England voted for the proposition for the 
gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. Wickliffe,] to impose an addi- 
tional duty on the importation of foreign spirits. 

If Pennsylvania be true to herself, she can vindicate her 
own rights. She has but to will it, and her farmers shall be pro- 
tected. Without the vote of her Representatives, this bill cannot 
pass. We have it in our power to impose any reasonable terms 
which we think proper. If we so determine, our whiskey will be 
protected. I appeal then to my colleagues ; I ask them, will you 
forego the only opportunity which we may ever have, of encour- 
aging one of the great staples of our State? If this bill should 
now become a law, can any person cherish the delusive hope, that 
we may have our staples protected the next year ? We shall then 
have all to ask. and nothing to give. If our farmers must pay 
16 



242 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

an additional price of 50 per cent, for the woollens which they 
wear, let them have some equivalent in the increased price of their 
grain. 

It has been contended, that this bill will essentially benefit 
llie agricultural interest; it has even been called an agricultural 
bill. Should it pass, the wool-growers will soon feel its in- 
jurious effects upon them, in the increased importation of foreign 
wool. But, even if it were beneficial to wool-growers, within a 
moderate distance of the great Eastern manufactories, could it 
produce any considerable effect upon our agriculture in the 
Middle States? Could our Pennsylvania farmers incur the ex- 
pense of sending their w^ool to New England, and sustain a 
competition there with the New England wool-grower? Cer- 
tainly not. I believe, unless it be the market which the Steuben- 
vilJe manufactory affords to the wool-growers of Western Penn- 
sylvania, but a small quantity of our wool leaves the State. It is 
an idle, a delusive hope, to expect that it can be transported to the 
New England manufactories. It is a mere shadow ; but it is one 
which I fear we shall exclusively pursue, instead of obtaining a 
great, a substantial, and a lasting benefit, which is placed within 
our grasp. 

There is another view of the subject, which demands the at- 
tention of this House. We ought never, by any act of legisla- 
tion, to invade the sinking fund of ten millions per annum, which 
has been pledged for the payment of the national debt. It should 
ever remain inviolate. It is holy ground. True policy demands 
that the national debt should be extinguished as speedily as pos- 
sible. In these halcyon times of peace, we are too prone to 
forget that we may be again involved in war ; that we may again 
have to resort to the credit of the nation to sustain its Govern- 
ment. What would be our condition, if we were compelled, in 
the vindication of the rights or the honor of the country, to enter 
into the contest encumbered with a large national debt? I leave 
each gentleman to answer this question for himself. This bill, 
should it become a law, will cut off about 1,500,000 dollars from 
our annual revenue. Our Treasury is not now in a condition to 
bear such a blow. This is a striking point of difference between 
protection and prohibition. In former tariffs, which have been 
merely protecting, although the increase of the duty diminished 
the importation of the foreign article, and thus promoted our 
domestic manufactures ; yet, that portion of foreign articles which 
still continued to be imported, by paying a higher rate of duty, 



1827] CONTROVERSY WITH GEORGIA 243 

has, heretofore, prevented the revenue from sinking. Such can- 
not be the case, under the operation of the present bill. 

Mr. B. again called upon his colleagues to assist him in 
imposing an additional duty on the importation of foreign spirits. 
He had expected aid in this attempt from New England, but 
experience had taught him that was a vain hope. He had be- 
lieved, from some remarks upon a former day, of the gentleman 
from Rhode Island, then in his eye, [Mr. Burges] that Pennsyl- 
vania would have had his powerful assistance, in protecting her 
domestic industry. He had declared that he would vote for an 
additional duty on foreign spirits, and on hemp. Mr. B. said, 
if he were mistaken, he wished that gentleman would correct 
him. [Here Mr. Burges observed, that, when the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania had done, he would then have an opportunity 
of answering him.] Mr. B. concluded by expressing a hope that 
the House would either now adjourn, as it was very late, to 
allow time for reflection, or else negative this bill, and thus con- 
strain its friends to unite with us in protecting other great inter- 
ests of the country, as well as the manufacture of woollens. 



REMARKS, FEBRUARY 9, 1827, 

ON THE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES 

AND GEORGIA.! 

Mr. Buchanan said, he regretted that the gentleman from 
Kentucky [Mr. Wickliffe] had withdrawn his motion to lay the 
message of the President upon the table. He believed much 
greater importance had been attached to the subject, than fairly 
belonged to it. In his opinion, it involved no question of civil 
war — nothing which ought to alarm the imagination of the most 
timid. He thought the subject should be laid upon the table, or 
referred to a Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, 
where he hoped it might sleep. 

Georgia claims all the land within her boundaries, under 
what has been called the treaty of the Indian Springs. The 
present Administration of the General Government allege, that 
the rights of Georgia have been limited by the subsequent Treaty 
of Washington. That State possesses the unquestionable right 
of having this question determined before the judicial tribunals 
of the countr}^ She has sent her surveyors into the Territory in 



' Register of Debates, 19 Cong. 2 Sess. 1826-1827, III. 1032-1034. 



244 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

dispute, for the purpose of surveying the land; and it does 
not at present occur to me in what other manner the question 
could have been raised for judicial determination. In this state 
of the controversy, the President of the United States has cer- 
tainly pursued the proper course — the course which the constitu- 
tion and laws of his country clearly prescribed. He has directed 
the Surveyors of Georgia to be arrested, and to be brought before 
a judicial tribunal for trial. Upon this trial, the respective claims 
of the United States and of Georgia will be fully and fairly inves- 
tigated, and their rights will be determined. This and this only 
is the question, and the whole cjuestion. 

Is there a tittle of testimony before this House tending to 
prove that Georgia will not submit peaceably to the judgment 
of the court, whatever it may be ? It would be doing injustice to 
that State, for a moment to suppose that she would not yield 
obedience to the laws of the country. I ask, then, what necessity 
is there for legislation upon this subject? Can legislation, at 
present, fairly influence the rights of the parties? The issue is 
joined between them, and must be decided according to existing 
laws. 

Sir, said Mr. B. although I believe the President has acted 
with the strictest propriety, in referring this question to the 
judiciary, yet I must be permitted to say, that, in another par- 
ticular, I cannot yield him my approbation. He ought not to 
have prejudged the case, and proclaimed his opinion to this 
House, and to the country. The law should have been permitted 
to take its regular course. The opinion of the President ought 
not to have been cast into the scale, either on the one side, or on 
the other. That opinion has been decidedly given against the 
State of Georgia. I do not profess to be a warm admirer of the 
President, but yet I feel great respect for any opinion which he 
has deliberately formed. It is entitled to much consideration; 
and, therefore, it would have been the more proper to have con- 
cealed it whilst the cause was depending. [Here Mr. B. read 
the following extract from the message of the President.] 

" It ought not, however, to be disguised, that the act of the 
Legislature of Georgia, under the construction given to it by the 
Governor of that State, and the surveys made, or attempted by 
his authority, beyond the boundary secured by the treaty of 
Washington, of April last, to the Creek Indians, are in direct 
violation of the supreme law of this land, set forth in a treaty 



1827] CONTROVERSY WITH GEORGIA 245 

which has received all the sanctions provided by the Constitution, 
which we have been sworn to support and maintain." 

Thus the Executive has assumed that the State of Georgia 
is wrong, which is the very question to be decided. He has de- 
termined that Georgia has violated the Constitution and the laws ; 
although this is the very matter which he has submitted to the 
Judiciary for their decision. He has prejudged the case. 

The President, in another part of his message, has held 
out a threat against Georgia — although the question whether he 
has acted illegally is still pending and undetermined. [Here Mr. 
Buchanan read the following extract from the message:] 

" In the present instance, it is my duty to say, that, if the 
Legislative and Executive authorities of the State of Georgia 
should persevere in acts of encroachment upon the territories 
secured by a solemn treaty to the Indians, and the laws of the 
Union remain unaltered, a superadded obligation, even higher 
than that of human authority, will compel the Executive of the 
United States to enforce the laws, and fulfil the duties of the 
nation by all the force committed for that purpose to his charge." 

It may be the duty of the Executive thus to act, in case the 
State of Georgia should persevere, after the determination of her 
rights has been referred to the Judiciary. Upon this point. I shall 
not at present express any opinion. But, Sir, was such language 
of the President conciliatory towards a sister State? Or was it 
not rather calculated to provoke that State, and produce the very 
evil which he dreads? I hope Georgia may submit peaceably to 
the Judicial tribunals of her country. If she should not, she 
will not receive my support. I trust, also, she will forbear from 
the expression of those angry feelings, which the occasion is well 
calculated to excite. 

I repeat that the President has my entire approbation, so far 
as respects the reference of this controversy to the Judiciary. I 
am sorry it has been referred to any committee in another body. 
It should have been left exclusively to the courts of justice. For 
the purpose of preventing the angry discussion which would 
probably arise upon this subject, Mr. B. said he would move to 
lay the message upon the table. 

The question being taken on this motion, it was decided in 
the negative. 



246 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

REMARKS, FEBRUARY 10, 1827, 

ON THE DUTIES ON WOOL AND WOOLLENS.^ 

Mr, Buchanan said, when I made the motion now under 
consideration, it was not my intention to trouble the House with 
a single remark. It was my sincere wish, that the question should 
have been immediately taken and decided by yeas and nays. I 
presume, however, that all who hear me must feel that I am 
imperatively called upon to reply to the obser\'ations which have 
been made by my colleague, [Mr. Lawrence,] whom I heretofore 
believed to be my friend. That gentleman has thought proper 
to attribute to me conduct, of which I believe I never before was 
suspected. I think I may appeal with confidence to those with 
whom I have long served upon this floor, whether, upon any 
occasion, I have attempted to defeat any measure by unfair 
means. I have always been willing to march up fairly to every 
question, and to vote and to act as I thought right, and then to 
leave my judgment to be re judged by my constituents and my 
country. 

My colleague asks why I did not submit my motion earlier? 
Although I deny his right to ask me such a question, yet I shall 
proceed to answer his inquiry. Since I came out of the Chair, 
I have been always prepared to offer an amendment to this bill, 
for the purpose of imposing additional duties on the importation 
of foreign spirits and foreign hemp. I have been constantly 
waiting for an opportunity of submitting this proposition to the 
House, at a time when there would be some chance of obtaining 
a direct decision upon it ; but have never been successful until the 
present occasion. Other amendments have hitherto been in my 
way, and have precluded me from making the attempt. The 
previous question has also been interposed, for the purpose of 
preventing or defeating all amendments. 

With what propriety, then, can my colleague, who has him- 

^ Register of Debates, iQ Cong. 2 Sess. 1826-1827, III. 1068-1070, 1080. 
Mr. Buchanan had moved that the bill making alterations in the tariff acts 
be recommitted to the committee on domestic manufactures, with instructions 
so to amend it as to make the duties on the importation of foreign woollen 
goods and foreign wool commence at the same time; and to make the 
duties the same on foreign wool whether imported upon the skin or not; 
also to increase the duty on the importation of foreign spirits not less than 
ten cents per gallon ; and also to increase the duty on the importation of 
foreign hemp not less than five dollars per ton. 



1827] DUTIES ON WOOL 247 

self voted for the previous question, and thus pursued a course 
calculated to prevent and to defeat every amendment, put such 
an interrogatory to me? If, by the Rules of the House, in order 
to accomplish my purpose, I must move to recommit this bill, 
that necessity has been imposed upon me by the course pursued 
by my colleague and others, who believe this bill to be perfect in 
its present form. My colleague ought not to be surprised by this 
motion: for I long since gave notice that, if the House should 
determine to consider this bill at the present session, it was my 
determination to insist that the farmers of Pennsylvania should 
receive protection, as well as the woollen manufacturers of New 
England. I distinctly stated, that I would offer an amendment, 
similar in its nature to the motion which I have now presented; 
and for a long time, I have had the sections which I intended to 
propose prepared, and in my desk. In this respect, therefore, I 
am not liable to the censure of my colleague, or that of any other 
person. 

My colleague has propounded another question to me, still 
more extraordinary in its character than his first interrogatory. 
He has asked me, how can any Pennsylvanian oppose this bill? 
He has said that Pennsylvania has a deep interest in this measure ; 
and that I have abandoned that interest, by submitting my motion. 
He has also, in effect, declared that no man could obtain, or could 
preserve the confidence of that State, who should oppose the pres- 
ent bill. Sir, said Mr. B., I feel an attachment as warm, a devo- 
tion as ardent, for my native State, as my colleague can feel. I 
would go as far to maintain either her interest or her honor, as 
any of her Representatives upon this floor. I have no interest 
but what is her interest. Whilst I have the honor to stand here 
before the nation, as one of her Representatives, I shall never 
be driven from that course which I believe will promote her true 
welfare and glory, by such threats as my colleague has thought 
proper to utter. His prophecies have no terrors for me. Whether 
my course shall be popular at home or not, I know that I have 
done what, in my conscience, I believed to be my duty. For my 
vote, I rejoice that I am answerable, not to my colleague, but to 
my constituents and my State — tribunals, in whose judgment my 
confidence is unbounded. 

My colleague has propounded several interrogatories to me ; 
in my turn, I shall now take the liberty of asking him a few 
questions. The provision of this bill which found the most 
favor in my eyes, was the protection which it proposed to extend 



248 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

to the wool-growers of this country. I ask my colleague if this 
protection bears any just proportion to that which is afforded to 
the woollen manufactures? Is it equal, or nearly equal, in de- 
gree? Does it commence at the same time? This bill pretends 
to be a compromise between the growers and manufacturers of 
wool; but it is clear, that the agriculturists, upon this, as upon 
all other occasions, have got the worst of the bargain. Whilst 
the manufacturer, after the first of AugList next, will he pro- 
tected by an enormous increase of duty, amounting, in a very 
great degree, to a prohibition of the importation of foreign 
woollens, the wool-grower must be content to wait until the first 
day of June, 1828. when there will be an increase of duty on the 
importation of foreign wool equal only to two cents per pound, 
and on the first day of June, 1829, another two cents will be 
added. This bill will afford the manufacturers an opportunity, 
between its passage and the first day of June, 1828, of obtaining 
a sufficient supply of foreign wool, without any increase of duty, 
to keep them in operation for years. Does any gentleman sup- 
pose — can any gentleman expect, that the patriotism of the manu- 
facturers — that their love for the wool-growers of their own 
country, will prevent them from obtaining a foreign supply? 
Before this can be believed, the laws which govern human nature 
must be reversed, and selfish feelings must be eradicated from the 
human bosom. In the mean time, our wool-growers must suffer 
the evils which will flow from an immense importation of foreign 
wool. 

But this is not all. Will the wool-grower receive any addi- 
tional protection, even after the first of June, 1829? Upon this 
point I entertain serious doubts ; and I find that some gentlemen 
of this House, better acquainted with the subject than myself, are 
of the same opinion. Under the provisions of this bill, wool upon 
the skin will continue to be imported at the present rate of duty. 
Now, sir, although the wool-grower in foreign countries never 
would kill his flock, merely for the purpose of evading our duties, 
by sending his wool upon the skin ; yet, it is equally certain, that 
the fleeces of those sheep which are killed for food, will naturally 
be brought to our markets. By passing this bill we shall estab- 
lish a discriminating duty in their favor. In this manner, there 
will be a sufficient quantity of foreign wool imported to create 
a competition, and to keep down the price of our domestic wool. 
I think, therefore, that, so far as this bill proposes to protect the 
wool-grower, it is a mere delusion. I put the question seriously 



1827] DIPLOMATIC OUTFITS 249 

to my colleague, who represents a wool-growing-, not a manufac- 
turing district, how he can justify an opposition to my motion, 
which proposes to afiford something like the same protection to the 
wool-grower which this bill does to the manufacturer? I reverse 
his question — and ask him, how he can vote for such a bill? 

Sir, said Mr. B., I am the decided friend of a tariff upon 
broad national principles; but I never can support a bill of this 
unjust and partial character: a bill which protects the w^oollen 
manufacturer of New England, whilst it leaves the agriculture 
of my own State to perish. Pennsylvania has, beyond compari- 
son, a much greater interest in obtaining an increased duty on 
foreign spirits and foreign hemp, than on foreign wool and 
woollens. Upon this subject, however, I shall not repeat the 
observations which I have made heretofore. I sincerelv believe 
should my motion prevail, so far from defeating the bill, it will 
be carried by an increased majority. I confess I felt surprised, 
both at the style and the manner of my colleague's observations. 
He is a gentleman for whom I have always felt much respect. If 
this had not been the case, my reply should have been dictated in 
a very different spirit. I do not expect my motion will prevail; 
I know it cannot prevail without the support of my colleagues. I 
shall be proud, however, to have the opportunity of recording my 
vote in its favor. 

* *lg ^f ^^ «^ ^* «^ «ir ^Ir %lf 

^f% ^% ^% *^ ^% ^^ *^ ^^ ^^ 

[Mr. Buchanan here explained. He said that, on the sub- 
ject of the revenue, he had taken the distinction between protec- 
tion and prohibition. An increase of duty for the purpose of 
protection diminished importation, and thus encouraged the do- 
mestic manufacturer. It, at the same time, presei"ved the revenue 
from sinking, by the higher duties which were levied on the 
foreign articles still imported. Such would be the effect of a 
mere increase of duty either on woollens or foreign spirits ; but 
prohibition would produce an effect entirely different.] 



REMARKS, FEBRUARY 15, 1827, 

ON OUTFITS FOR DIPLOMATIC OFFICERS.' 

Mr. Buchanan said, he rose chiefly to express his dissent 
from the doctrine which had been advanced by his friends from 



Register of Debates, 19 Cong. 2 Sess. 1826-1827, III. 1187-1188. 



250 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

Georgia and Pennsylvania, [Mr. Forsyth and Mr. Ingham.] If 
he understood those gentlemen correctly, they opposed this appro- 
priation, because an unexpended balance remained of the appro- 
priation of the last year, out of which the President might, at his 
discretion, give Mr. Poinsett an outfit, under the act of 1810. 
Sir, said Mr. B. I deny that the President has any such authority 
under that law. 

*(* 3(S 3j» 5|C .»jC 3ji 5jt 5^ SjC SfC 

Mr. Buchanan said he had yielded the floor to his friend from 
Georgia, that he might make an explanation, not an argument. 

Standing here as a representative of the People, I should feel 
that I had not discharged my duty, [said Mr. B.] if I were 
silently to suffer this appropriation to be altogether stricken out 
of the bill, when I would be among the first to disapprove the con- 
duct of the President, should he allow this outfit without the sanc- 
tion of Congress. The President has pursued the proper course 
in coming here to ask for it. I rejoice that he has done so; and 
the question is now left to be determined by the sound discretion 
of this House. 

The different acts of Congress, which were in force previous 
to 1 810, made no special provision for cases in which the Presi- 
dent might, or might not, allow an outfit. They did not prevent 
him from allowing an outfit to a minister who should be trans- 
ferred from one court to another. Their language is general. 
But, sir, what is now the case? I deny that, under the act of 
1 8 10, there is the least ground upon which to rest a doubt. The 
language of that law places doubt at defiance. There is no room 
for construction. It has expressly limited the power of the Presi- 
dent, in the allowance of outfits. They can be allowed only to 
ministers, on going from the United States to any foreign coun- 
try. Mr. B. here read the following clause from the act of 1810: 
" Provided it shall be lawful for the President of the United 
States to allow to a Minister Plenipotentiar}'-, or Charge des 
Affaires, on going from the United States to any foreign country, 
an- outfit, which shall, in no case, exceed one year's full salary 
of such Minister, or Charge des Affaires." 

Thus it clearly appears that Congress have reserved to them- 
selves the decision of all cases, except the allowance of an outfit 
to a Minister or Charge, on his leaving this country. Has the 
President, then, any power to allow Mr. Poinsett an outfit? Cer- 
tainly not. He has already received one, when he left the United 



1827] DIPLOMATIC OUTFITS 251 

States. He is now in Mexico, and Tacubaya is distant but nine 
miles from that citv. 

I know that the act of 1810 has been violated in several in- 
stances; and I know that the present administration ought not 
alone to be blamed for such violations. They existed before it 
came into power. I do not care how many precedents have been 
established against it. It is still the law of the land. Its viola- 
tion cannot be sanctioned by this House, unless we are willing 
to place the Executive above the law. The doctrine of prece- 
dents, in such cases, is dangerous in the extreme. One precedent 
begets another. A hard case, having reason for its support, 
makes the first precedent. It is made the foundation for another 
and another, until the law is forgotten or disregarded. If we 
should continue to pursue this course, we shall get fairly on the 
road to ruin. I feel gratified, therefore, that the President has 
come forward and asked us for this appropriation. It is but 
justice to myself that I should say so. 

The question then recurs, ought we to allow an outfit? and, if 
so, how much? I am free to confess, that, in my opinion, Mr. 
Poinsett should have some additional allowance. His expenses 
must be increased by his new mission. He must often visit Tacu- 
baya, and he will be obliged to keep up a hospitable intercourse 
with the Ministers of the different nations who may there be 
assembled. I would not increase his expenses and his labor, with- 
out adding to his compensation. But I cannot agree that he shall 
have a full outfit. Surely he is not entitled to receive as much 
for travelling from Mexico to Tacubaya, as he would be for 
going from the United States to London, to Paris, or to St. Peters- 
burg. The President has no discretion to allow more than 9,000 
dollars as an outfit, even in such cases. To allow this amount 
to Mr. Poinsett, in the case now before us, would be to destroy 
that just proportion between compensation and service which 
ought ever to exist. It would be unjust to Mr. Poinsett to allow 
him nothing; it would be equally unjust to the People of the 
United States to allow him 9,000 dollars. I am willing to give 
him half an outfit, and I, therefore, move to strike out 9,000* 
dollars, and insert 4,500 dollars. 

The Speaker informed Mr. Buchanan, that, in the present 
state of the question, his motion was not in order. 

Mr. B. then declared, that if the House should refuse to grant 
$9,000, he would move to insert $4,500. 



252 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

REMARKS, FEBRUARY 16, 1827, 

ON AN APPROPRIATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF 
THE CUMBERLAND ROAD.' 

Air. Buchanan said that, as he intended to vote for this 
appropriation, he thought it was proper to make known the 
reasons upon which he should act. He had not voted for the 
extension of the road to Zanesville, because he thought experi- 
ence had sufficiently shown that Congress ought not to make a 
road unless they could provide the means for keeping it in repair; 
and the moment they attempted this, they introduced a subject 
of endless contention. For this reason, if the present was a new 
measure, it should not receive his approbation ; but it was begun 
and in progress, and it was now too late to oppose it. Congress 
had passed upon the question; the road had been laid out; it 
was partly completed ; bridges had been erected ; and to stop 
at such a point a work commenced under the faith of an act of 
Congress, was not. in his view, compatible with the dignity or 
good faith of the Government. 

There was one other consideration. The appropriation did 
not involve any constitutional question — but one. " Whether the 
United States may. as proprietor, make a road in a State with the 
consent of that State? " for, in the present case, the consent of 
Ohio had been obtained. The right to do this, as proprietor, with 
consent, and the right to erect toll-gates, as a sovereign, without 
consent, were widelv different. 



REMARKS, FEBRUARY 20, 1827, 

ON INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS. ^ 

Mr. Buchanan said, he rose to state the reasons which would 
induce him to vote in favor of the appropriation of $30,000 to 
defray the expense of surveying routes for roads and canals, 
during the present year. It was not his intention to follow his 
friend from Virginia [Mr. Rives] through the extensive range 
of his argument. The late period of the Session, and the mass 
of important business which yet remained untouched, admonished 
him not to pursue such a course. Even if lie had considered it a 
proper time to enter extensivclv into the debate, he should not be 

^ Register of Debates, ig Cong. 2 Sess. 1826-1827, III. 1220. 

' Register of Debates, 19 Cong. 2 Sess. 1826-1827. III. 1283-1285. 



18!27] INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS 253 

disposed to controvert many of the facts which that gentleman 
had stated, or the arguments which he had urged. In most of 
them he entirely concurred. 

What, sir, is the nature of the question now presented to 
the House? In April, 1824, after a long and able discussion. 
Congress passed the act for the purpose of procuring the neces- 
sary surveys, plans, and estimates, upon the subjects of roads and 
canals. This law gives to the President the power of causing 
such routes for roads and canals to be surveyed, as he may deem 
of national importance, in a commercial or military point of view, 
or necessary for the transportation of the public mail. The 
gentleman from Virginia has, in effect, called upon us to repeal 
this important act, in an appropriation bill, at the very close of 
the session. Nothing should ever be attempted in such a bill, 
but to appropriate the money necessary for carrying into effect 
existing laws. The great principles of our national policy which 
have received the sanction of Congress in solemn acts of legisla- 
tion, ought never to be brought into discussion upon the general 
appropriation bills, which we must annually pass. This is not 
the proper time. The gentleman might, at an earlier period of 
the session, have called upon us to repeal, or to modify, the act of 
1824. Whilst that act remains upon your statute book, it would 
be at war with the correct rules of legislation virtually to blot 
it out, by refusing the appropriation necessary to carry it into 
effect. In the passage of an appropriation bill, there are but two 
proper considerations — Do existing laws demand the appropria- 
tion? And, if so, what is the amount necessary to give them 
effect? If the President has abused the discretion vested in him 
by the act of 1824 — if he has violated the high trust which it 
conferred upon him for the public good, and used it for political 
purposes — these are powerful reasons why that trust should be 
withdrawn, and why it should be vested in Congress. Without 
expressing any opinion at the present time upon the conduct of 
the Executive, I agree with the gentleman from Virginia, that it 
is the duty of Congress to specify, by law, the routes which 
ought to be surveyed. It is a power which properly belongs 
to them. At the next session, if the gentleman from Vir- 
ginia and myself should again meet, I shall cheerfully assist 
him in effecting such a change in the existing law. But, if he 
should now be successful in his attempt, what will be the effect ? 
Does he propose to designate, in this bill, the routes to be sur- 
veyed during the present year? He does not; he cannot. The 



254 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

inevitable consequence, in case the appropriation should now be 
stricken out, must be, at once, to paralyze the whole system of 
internal improvement. I am not prepared, and I trust the House 
is not prepared, for such a result. 

For what purpose have we established a Military Academy 
at West Point? Is it not that the skill and the science which 
the graduates of that institution acquire may become beneficial 
to the country? Several brigades of Topographical Engineers, 
constituted chiefly of the officers of your Army, have been organ- 
ized since the passage of the act of 1824, and have been employed 
in surveying the routes of Roads and Canals. Withdraw this 
appropriation, and you suspend all their operations. You take 
many of our officers from an employment highly useful to them- 
selves and to their country ; and you doom them either to lounge 
away their time in idleness, or you send them to drill the soldiers, 
at what has been called the School of Discipline, at Old Point 
Comfort. 

If the Government of the United States should never expend 
a single dollar upon the construction of Roads and Canals, still 
the services of our Engineers would be of immense importance 
to the country. In this manner, public attention is directed 
towards the subject of internal improvement. The numerous 
advantages which our country possesses for the construction of 
Roads and Canals, are brought fully and fairly into the view 
of the People. Accurate surveys and accurate estimates of the 
expense of different routes are furnished. A wide field is thus 
presented for the enterprise of individuals and of States, and a 
salutary impulse is given to the great cause of Internal Improve- 
ment. In my opinion it would be miserable economy to abandon 
all these advantages, for the sake of saving thirty thousand 
dollars. 

The gentleman from Virginia complains, with justice, that 
the great number of sur\'-eys which have been already made, and 
are now making, in different portions of the Union, have excited 
false hopes among the People. That the present Administration, 
by holding out the delusive expectation that Roads and Canals 
would be constructed by the General Government, wherever routes 
had been surveyed, have attempted to purchase the favor of the 
People with their own money. If this be the case, the evil will 
soon cure itself. Such hopes cannot long continue, after the 
publication of the document which we have lately received from 
the War Department. That document presents us a list of thirty- 
five different routes for Roads and Canals, which the Department 



1827] REPAIRS TO WHITE HOUSE 255 

has already ordered to be surveyed. We are not furnished with 
estimates of the expense of their construction; but the number 
is so great, that, hereafter, the People of this country will never 
be persuaded to believe the General Government is either able 
or willing to construct all, or even any considerable number of 
those Roads and Canals, the routes of which may be surveyed 
under their authority. We have at present no money to spare 
for any one of tliese objects, unless we should determine to violate 
the sinking fund, and thus postpone the payment of the national 
debt. Still, however, an extension of these surveys will be highly 
useful, inasmuch as they will employ the science of our officers 
in pointing out to the People such works of public improvement 
as may be advantageously constructed by themselves, and in 
stimulating them to exertion, by inducing them to undertake their 
accomplishment, and to depend upon themselves for success. 

The gentleman from Virginia has made an observation 
which I feel myself called upon to notice. He has stated that the 
survey of the Buffalo road was probably intended to secure the 
allegiance of Pennsylvania to the present Administration. In 
my opinion they should stand acquitted of any such purpose. 
To suppose that such was their intention, would be to suppose 
them ignorant both of the character and feelings of the people 
of that State. When was Pennsylvania ever known to be faith- 
less to the cause which she had once espoused? When was she 
ever known to have abandoned the man in whom she once con- 
fided, without any reason to justify her change? To be steady 
to her purpose has ever been a striking trait in her character. 
She will continue to be true to her own cause. I cannot, there- 
fore, for a moment, believe, that the present Administration 
could ever have conceived the idea, that it was possible to purchase 
Pennsylvania by bestowing upon her such a boon as the survey 
of a national road from Washington to Buffalo. 



REMARKS, FEBRUARY 23, 1827, 

ON AN APPROPRIATION FOR FURNISHING AND REPAIRING 

THE WHITE HOUSE. 1 

Mr. Buchanan said, he was surprised, after being out of the 
House about an hour, to find an entire change of sides. His 



'Register of Debates, 19 Cong. 2 Sess. 1826-1827, III. 1376. 



256 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

friend from New York, who had usually been on the opposite 
side, and the two gentlemen from Massachusetts, had changed 
sides. He hoped he should never give a vote against finishing ^ 
the palace we have built, worthy of the dignity of the nation ; 
and if he now voted against the 25,000 dollars, it would be in con- 
sequence of the arguments of the gentleman from Massachusetts. 
He did not think the appropriation of 25,000 dollars too much. 
It could not have been improperly used, because it had not been 
drawn. He should vote for the proposition of the gentleman 
from Massachusetts; but if he would withdraw liis amendment, 
he would vote for the 25,000 dollars, not doubting the vote would 
be sustained by the American People. 



REMARKS, FEBRUARY 24, 1827, 

ON THE REPAIR OF THE CUMBERLAND ROAD.2 

Mr. Buchanan observed, that it would, probably, be recol- 
lected, he had given notice, on a former occasion, that, when this 
bill was taken up, he should move an amendment, which went to 
strike out that part of it which provides for the erection of toll- 
gates. He had been prevented, by circumstances which were 
known to the House, from redeeming this pledge. He was ready 
to do it now, but was requested by gentlemen all around him, 
not to bring forward his amendment until the bill should have 
passed through the Committee of the Whole, and should come 
into tlie House for discussion. As the present was the last day 
appropriated for the consideration of private bills, (among which, 
it seemed, the present bill was to be classed,) and, as from the 
magnitude of the subject, he had no doubt its discussion would 
occupy the whole day, he had concluded to yield to the suggestion 
which was pressed upon him, and would pursue the course that 
gentlemen requested. 

Mr. Buchanan complained that the gentleman from Virginia 
had attempted to distinguish the advocates and opponents of the 
present bill, as the friends and enemies of Internal Improvement; 



' So in the Register of Debates, but doubtless is an error for " furnishing." 
'Register of Debates, ig Cong. 2 Sess. 1826-1827, III. 1397, 1398. i3Q9- 
1400, 1403-1404. 



18'i7] THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 257 

and though he had not expressly asserted that he [Mr. B.] was 
hostile to those improvements, he left it as a fair inference to be 
drawn by all who heard him. 

[Mr. Mercer explained: He had alluded, in his remarks, 
not to the gentleman particularly, but to all the members of the 
Pennsylvania Delegation.] 

Mr. B. resumed. None could be more friendly to this great 
national undertaking, the Cumberland Road, than he was, and 
ever had been. He had no doubt as to the constitutional question 
of the power of the Federal Government, so far as that power 
could be usefully applied to this object: but he doubted its power 
to set up toll-gates, and exact toll of all who travelled the road. 
He again declared, explicitly, that he was not opposed to the con- 
struction of the road. So far from being hostile to it, he was 
willing to postpone the discussion of the great question concern- 
ing the extent of the power of the General Government, and to 
grant any sum, in moderation, to save the road from ruin. If the 
gentleman from Maryland would be content with inserting 
30,000 dollars, instead of 50,000 dollars, in the blank in his 
amendment, that amendment should have his cheerful support. 
The bill, in its original form, proposed but 45,000 dollars for 
the whole expense of repairs and toll-gates, &c. Why, then, 
should the gentleman ask 50,000 dollars for repairs merely? 
If the friends of the amendment were willing to take such a 
sum as was needed to save the road from ruin, he was ready to 
vote for the appropriation. But, if the question as to toll-gates 
was forced upon him, he should be compelled, by what he owed 
himself, to go at large into an explanation of the reasons which 
forbade him to advocate such a measure. 

ais sic 2k stc >tc sk S^tf ^k ^tf ^tr 

Mr. Buchanan expressed great astonishment that the gentle- 
man who had just taken his seat should have addressed such an 
appeal to him. He was but a solitary individual, and had never 
claimed, in the remotest manner, to be considered or treated as 
the organ of the Pennsylvania Delegation on that floor. He was 
there on his own responsibility. He answered for no man, and 
was controlled by no man. He knew his own opinion, and was 
willing to express it whenever properly called upon. He had 
already declared, and now again proclaimed his willingness to 
postpone the argument as to toll-gates, and to support .the amend- 
ment appropriating 30,000 dollars for present repairs. He did 

17 



258 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

not mean to be drawn into any further argument on the subject, 
unless the whole question was to be gone into, and he regretted 
that the gentleman from Virginia had thought proper to begin 
the discussion on the constitutional question. For himself, he 
could say, after much reflection, that he believed that the assump- 
tion of the power to establish toll-gates by the authority of the 
General Government, would be a longer stride towards consolida- 
tion than any other which had yet been taken. He viewed it as 
a fearful effort to destroy our present happy system of Govern- 
ment. If the Government had power to do this on one road, 
they had power to do it on all roads, whether constructed for the 
purpose of commercial intercourse or of war. They might take 
at once the whole of those roads under their immediate jurisdic- 
tion, and punish, with sovereign authority, all offences committed 
thereon. There was a great difference between the State and 
Federal jurisdictions. If the latter were established, the former 
must be prostrated. He did not, however, wish, at this time, to 
enter at all upon this question. Nor should he have said thus 
much, had not the gentleman from Virginia broached the subject. 
Mr. B. concluded, by observing, that he hoped the gentleman 
from Maryland would consent to modify his amendment by sub- 
stituting 30,000 dollars for 50,000 dollars, and that, in this form, 
it would prevail. 

%i. ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ <J^ ^ ^ ^Lr 

Jf^ ^n, >^ *J* *^ *^ *^ *^ ^* ^* 

The amendment of Mr. Barney was now read in its original 
form : whereupon 

Mr. Buchanan moved to amend it by striking out 50,000 
dollars, and inserting, in lieu thereof, $30,000. 

Mr. Buchanan said that he had no wish, in the motion he 
made, to throw obstacles in the way of the passage of the bill. 
He had certainly understood the gentleman from Maryland as 
being willing to modify his amendment so as to make it read 
30,000 dollars. 

Mr. Barney replied, that he had expressed such a willing- 
ness; but as gentlemen did not seem agreed respecting the sum 
to be appropriated, he would modify his amendment by leaving 
the sum in blank. 

Mr. Peter now moved to fill the blank with 50,000 dollars ; 
and the question being put on so filling it, was decided in the 
affirmative — Ayes 62 ; noes 54. 



1827] THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 259 

The amendment, thus modijfied, having been adopted, the 
residue of the original bill, as reported by the Committee on 
Roads and Canals, was stricken out. 

The Committee of the Whole then rose, and reported the bill 
as amended. 

In the House — 

Mr. Buchanan moved to strike out 50,000 dollars, and insert 
30,000 dollars ; and on this question he asked the yeas and nays, 
w^hich were ordered by the House. 

Mr. Mercer made some observations of an explanatory kind, 
and appealed to Mr. Buchanan as to the propriety of pressing 
his motion. 

Mr. Buchanan said, that consistency and duty required him 
to make the motion, and he could not withdraw it. He had stated 
again and again that he was friendly to the road; but as the 
Committee of Roads and Canals had asked for but 45,000 dollars 
for repairs, toll-gates, and toll-houses, he could not consent to 
give 50,000 dollars for repairs only. Mr. B. concluded with the 
calculations as to the expense of gates and toll-houses, from 
whence he inferred, that, when that expense was deducted from 
the 45,000 dollars, the balance for repairs could not be over 
30,000 dollars. 

Mr. Lawrence rose to correct these calculations, and insisted, 
from estimates which he had seen, that gates and houses might be 
erected for 6,000 dollars. He opposed the motion of Mr. 
Buchanan, and insisted that 50,000 dollars was as small a sum 
as ought to be granted, if any effectual repairs were contem- 
plated. 

The question was then taken on the motion of Mr. Buchanan, 
by yeas and nays, as follows : 

*>^ ^1^ ^1^ xt^ xj^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ 

*J* *^ 'T* '^ 'f* *J* ^^ >^ ^K 

So the House agreed to amend the amendment, by reducing 
the sum appropriated from 50,000 to 30,000 dollars. 



260 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

TO MR. INGHAM.' 

Lancaster 12 July 1827. 
Dear Sir/ 

I received yours yesterday evening- & hasten to give it an 
immediate answer. With you, I regret the pubHcation of Gen: 
Jackson's letter to Mr. Beverly. It may do harm but cannot 
do good. The conversation which I held with the General will 
not sustain his letter; although it may furnish a sufficient reason 
for his misapprehension. My single purpose was to ascertain 
from him, whether he had ever declared he would appoint Mr. 
Adams Secretary of State in case he were elected President. As 
to the propriety & policy of propounding this question to him 1 
had reflected much & had taken the advice of a distinguished 
Jackson man then high in office in Pennsylvania. I had no doubt 
at the time, that my question if answered at all would be answered 
in the negative; but I wished it to come from himself that he 
stood uncommitted upon this subject. 

In my interview with the General which bye the bye was 
on the street, I stated the particulars of a conversation between 
Philip S. Markley & myself — as one reason why he should 
answer the question which I had propounded. Out of my repe- 
tition of this conversation the mistake must have arisen. This 
conversation would be one link in the chain of testimony ; but 
of itself, it is altogether incomplete. 

How Gen : Jackson could have ever believed I came to him 
as an emissary from Mr. Clay or his friends to make a corrupt 
bargain with him in their behalf I am at a loss to determine. He 
could not have received this impression until after Clay & his 
friends had actually elected Adams President: and Adams had 
appointed Clay Secretary of State. Although I continued to be 
upon terms of the strictest intimacy with Gen: Jackson whilst 
he continued at Washington, & have corresponded with him 
occasionally ever since, he has never once adverted to the subject. 
From the terms of his letters to me I never could have suspected 
that he ever for a moment supposed me capable of becoming the 
agent in such a negotiation. The idea that such was his impres- 
sion never once flitted across my mind, until I received a letter 
from Green dated the 30th ultimo. 



' Buchanan Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania. Also, Curtis's 
Buchanan, I. 51. 



1827] FROM GENERAL JACKSON 261 

When regularly called upon I need not tell you that I shall 
speak the truth. If the matter be properly managed it will not 
injure General Jackson; but I can readily conceive that such 
a course may be taken in relation to it by some of our friends 
as will materially injure his prospects. 

from your friend 

James Buchanan. 
The Hon : Samuel D. Ingham. 



FROM GENERAL JACKSON.' 

Hermitage July 15th 1827. 

Dr Sir 

You will see from the enclosed publication of Mr. Clay repelling the 
statement made by me respecting the propositions said to have been made 
by his friends to mine & to me & intended to operate upon the last 
election for president, that it becomes necessary for the public to be put in 
possession of the facts. In doing this you are aware of the position which 
you occupy, and which I trust you will sustain when properly called on. 
Ever since the publication and the enquiry before the House of Representa- 
tives in January & February 1825 questions have been propounded from 
various sources calculated to draw from me the information I had upon that 
unpleasant subject. Many no doubt with sinister views placing me in selfish 
connections with the facts, from my accustomed silence have sought to fortify 
the character of Mr. Clay : But in a number of cases where enquiry seemed 
to be prompted by a frank & generous desire to obtain the truth I felt 
myself bound to answer in a corresponding spirit; and accordingly the state- 
ment made by you to me has been on several occasions repeated, as it was to 
Mr. Beverly who visited me at my house where he found a number of his 
friends & relatives. 

Having tarried all night, in the morning conversing on politics, the 
question so often put to me before was asked by Mr. Beverly. It was 
answered. Mr. B. went to Nashville & wrote to his friend in No. Carolina 
who it appears published his letter. On the 15th of May last he wrote me 
from Louisville requesting to be informed whether the statement made by 
him was correct & observing that his letter was not intended for publication. 
Not having seen the letter as published there was no safe alternative for 
me but that adopted of making the statement as you will see in the enclosed 
paper. 

I shall now in reply to Mr. Clay's appeal give my authority accom- 
panied by the statement you made to Major John H. Eaton & to Mr. 
Kreamer & leave Mr. Clay to his further enquiries. He cannot be indulged 
by me in a paper war or newspaper discussion. Had his friends not voted 
out Mr. McDuffie's resolutions, when Mr. Clay threw himself upon the House 



^ Buchanan Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania. Also, Curtis's 
Buchanan, I. 52, and 53-54, where an extract from Clay's vindication is given. 



262 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

the truth or falsehood of these statements would have been made manifest 
& the public mind now at rest upon this subject. That they did will 
appear, reference being had to the National Journal of the 5th of February 
1825. You will recollect that Mr. McDuffie moved to instruct the committee 
to enquire whether the friends of Mr. Clay have hinted that they would fight 
for those who pay best, & whether overtures were said to have been made 
by the friends of Mr. Clay oflfering him the appointment of Secretary of 
State for his aid to elect Mr. Adams, & whether his friends gave this 
information to the friends of Genl Jackson & hinted that if the friends of 
Jackson would close with them &c. &c. giving the committee the power 
to examine on oath. 

I have no doubt when properly called on you will come forth & affirm 
the statement made to Major Eaton, then to Mr. Kreamer & then to me, 
& give the names of the friends of Mr. Clay who made it to you. 

I will thank you to acknowledge the receipt of this letter on its reaching 
you. 

I have the honor to be with great respect yr. mo. obdt. servt. 

Andrew Jackson. 
The Honble 

James Buchanan Esq. 



TO DUFF GREEN.' 

The United States Telegraph, July, 1827, published, under 
the head of " Bargain and Corruption," the following article : 

" All that the public will require of General Jackson, is, that 
he shall give the name of his distinguished friend, through whom 
the views of Mr. Clay's friends were communicated to him. 
Immediately upon the receipt of General Jackson's letter to Mr. 
Beverley, we enclosed a copy of it to that distinguished member 
of Congress, and received the following reply : 

" ' , July 16, 1827. 

" ' Dear Sir : I received yours of the 30th ultimo, on the 
morning of the 5th instant. In answer to it, I can only, at 
present, refer you to my answer to yours of the 12th of October 
last.- I have a very distinct recollection of the only conversation 
I ever held with General Jackson, concerning the last presidential 
election, prior to its termination, and when compelled to disclose 
it, I need not say, that I will speak the truth. 

'The author of this letter, as appears by the references in it, was 
Buchanan, as was affirmed by Colton, in his Life and Times of Henry Clay, 

I- 359- 

' Supra, p. 218. 



1827] PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF 1825 263 

" ' Everything in this state Pennsylvania, at present, looks 
well for the general. We have been making great exertions in 
his behalf. The character of the proposed convention of states 
at Harrisburg, seems now to be pretty well understood. I hope 
that nothing may occur to mar his prospects here, as a doubt 
about the vote of this state, might have a serious effect against 

him throughout the Union. 

" ' From your friend. 



TO THE EDITOR OF THE LANCASTER JOURNAL, 

AUGUST 8, 1827.1 

To THE Editor of the Lancaster Journal: 

The Cincinnati Journal was last night placed in my hands 
by a friend, containing an address from General Jackson to the 
public, in which he announces me to be the member of Congress, 
to whom he had referred, in his letter to Mr. Beverley, of the 
6th of June last. The duty which I owe to the public, and to 
myself, now compels me to publish to the world the only conver- 
sation which I ever held with General Jackson, upon the subject 
of the last presidential election, prior to its termination. 

In the month of December, 1824, a short time after the 
commencement of the session of Congress, I heard, among other 
rumors then in circulation, that General Jackson had determined, 
should he be elected president, to continue Mr. Adams secretary 
of state. Although I felt certain he had never intimated such 
an intention, yet I was sensible, that nothing could be better 
calculated, both to cool the ardor of his friends, and inspire his 
enemies with confidence, than the belief that he had already 
selected his chief competitor for the highest office within his gift. 
I thought General Jackson owed it to himself, and to the cause 
in which his political friends were engaged, to contradict this 
report; and to declare that he would not appoint to that office 
the man, however worthy he might be, who stood at the head of 
the most formidable part of his political enemies. These being 
my impressions, I addressed a letter to a confidential friend in 
Pennsylvania, then and still high in office, and exalted in charac- 
ter, and one who had ever been the decided advocate of General 



' Reprinted in Colton's Life and Times of Henry Clay, I. 352-355. 



264 J HE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

Jackson's election, requesting his opinion and advice upon the 
subject. I received his answer, dated the 27th of December, 
1824, upon the 29th, which is now before me, and which strength- 
ened and confirmed my previous opinion. I then finally deter- 
mined, either that I would ask General Jackson myself, or get 
another of his friends to ask him, whether he had ever declared 
he would appoint Mr. Adams his secretary of state? In this 
manner. I hoped a contradiction of the report might be obtained 
from himself, and that he might probably declare it was not his 
intention to appoint Mr. Adams. 

A short time previous to the receipt of the letter, to which 
I have referred, my friend, Mr. Markley, and myself, got into 
conversation, as we very often did, both before and after, upon 
the subject of the presidential election, and concerning the person 
who would probably be selected by General Jackson to fill the 
office of secretary of state. I feel sincerely sorry, that I am 
compelled thus to introduce his name ; but I do so with the less 
reluctance, because it has already, without any agency of mine, 
found its way into the newspapers, in connexion with this 
transaction. 

Mr. Markley adverted to the rumor, which I have mentioned, 
and said it was calculated to injure the general. He observed 
that Mr. Clay's friends were warmly attached to him, and that 
he thought they would endeavor to act in concert at the election ; 
that if they did so, they could either elect Mr. Adams or General 
Jackson, at their pleasure; but that many of them would never 
agree to vote for the latter, if they knew he had predetermined 
to prefer another to Mr. Clay for the first office in his gift; and 
that some of the friends of Mr. Adams had already been holding 
out the idea, that, in case he were elected, Mr. Clay might 
probably be offered the situation of secretary of state. 

I told Mr. Markley, that I felt confident General Jackson 
had never said he would appoint Mr. Adams secretary of state, 
because he was not in the habit of conversing upon the subject 
of the election ; and if he were, whatever might be his secret 
intention, he had more prudence than to make such a declaration. 
I mentioned to him, that I had been thinking, either that I would 
call upon the general myself, or get one of his other friends 
to do so, and thus endeavor to obtain from him a contradiction 
of the report, although I doubted whether he w-ould hold any 
conversation upon the subject. 

Mr. Markley urged me to do so; and observed, if General 



1827] PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF 18^25 265 

Jackson had not determined whom he would appoint secretary 
of state, and should say that it would not be Mr. Adams, it might 
be of great advantage to our cause for us so to declare, upon his 
own authority. We should then be placed upon the same footing 
with the Adams men, and might fight them with their own 
weapons. That the western members would naturally prefer 
voting for a western man, if there were a probability that the 
claims of Mr. Clay to the second office in the government should 
be fairly estimated ; and that, if they thought proper to vote for 
General Jackson, they could soon decide the contest in his favor. 
A short time after this conversation, on the 30th of Decem- 
ber, 1824 (I am able to fix the time, not only from my own 
recollection, but from letters which I wrote on that day, on the 
day following, and on the 2d of January, 1825), I called upon 
General Jackson. After the company had left him, by which 
I found him surrounded, he asked me to take a walk with him ; 
and, while we were walking together upon the street, I intro- 
duced the subject. I told him I wished to ask him a question 
in relation to the presidential election; that I knew he was un- 
willing to converse upon the subject; that, therefore, if he 
deemed the question improper, he might refuse to give it an 
answer; that my only motive in asking it, was friendship for 
him, and I trusted he would excuse me for thus introducing a 
subject about which I knew he wished to be silent. 

His reply was complimentary to myself, and accompanied 
with a request, that I would proceed. I then stated to him, there 
was a report in circulation, that he had determined he would 
appoint Mr. Adams secretary of state, in case he were elected 
president, and that I wished to ascertain from him, whether he 
had ever intimated such an intention ; that he must at once per- 
ceive how injurious to his election such a report might be ; that 
no doubt there were several able and ambitious men in the coun- 
try, among whom I thought Mr. Clay might be included, who 
were aspiring to that office; and, if it were believed he had 
already determined to appoint his chief competitor, it might have 
a most unhappy effect upon their exertions, and those of then- 
friends ; that, unless he had so determined. I thought this report 
should be promptly contradicted under his own authority. 

I mentioned it had already probably done him some injury, 
and proceeded to relate to him the substance of the conversation 
I had held with Mr. Markley. I do not remember, whether I 
mentioned his name, or merely described him as a friend of Mr. 



266 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

Clay. After I had finished, the general declared, he had not 
the least objection to answer my question; that he thought well 
of Mr. Adams, but had never said, or intimated, that he would, 
or would not, appoint him secretary of state; that these were 
secrets he would keep to himself — he would conceal them from 
the very hairs of his head ; that if he believed his right hand then 
knew what his left would do on the subject of appointments to 
office, he would cut it off, and cast it into the fire; that if he 
should ever be elected president, it would be without solicitation, 
and without intrigue, on his part; that he would then go into 
office perfectly free and untrammelled, and would be left at per- 
fect liberty to fill the offices of the government with the men, 
whom, at the time, he believed to be the ablest and the best in 
the country. 

I told him, that this answer to my question was such a one 
as I had expected to receive, if he answered it at all; and that 
I had not sought to obtain it for my own satisfaction. I then 
asked him, if I were at liberty to repeat his answer? He said, 
I was at perfect liberty to do so, to any person I thought proper. 
I need scarcely remark, that I afterward availed myself of the 
privilege. The conversation upon this topic here ended, and in 
all our intercourse since, whether personally, or in the course of 
our correspondence, General Jackson never once adverted to the 
subject, prior to the date of his letter to Mr. Beverley. 

I do not recollect, that General Jackson told me I might 
repeat his answer to Mr. Clay and his friends; though I should 
be sorry to say he did not. The whole conversation being upon 
a public street, it might have escaped my observation. 

A few remarks, and I trust I shall have done with this dis- 
agreeable business forever. 

I called upon General Jackson, upon the occasion which I 
have mentioned, solely as his friend, upon my individual responsi- 
bility, and not as the agent of Mr. Clay or any other person. I 
never have been the political friend of Mr. Clay, since he became 
a candidate for the office of president, as you very well know. 
Until I saw General Jackson's letter to Mr. Beverley, of the 
6th ult., and at the same time was informed by a letter from the 
editor of the United States Telegraph, that I was the person to 
whom he alluded, the conception never once entered my head, 
that he believed me to be the agent of Mr. Clay, or of his friends, 
or that T had intended to propose to him terms of any kind from 
them, or that he could have supposed me to be capable of express- 



1827] PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF 1825 267 

ing- '■ the opinion that it was right to fight such intriguers with 
their own weapons." Such a supposition, had I entertained it, 
would have rendered me exceedingly unhappy, as there is no man 
upon earth, whose good opinion I more valued, than that of 
General Jackson. He could not, I think, have received this im- 
pression, until after Mr. Clay and his friends had actually 
elected Mr. Adams president, and Mr. Adams had appointed 
Mr. Clay secretary of state. After these events had transpired, 
it may be readily conjectured, in what manner my communication 
might have led him into the mistake. I deeply deplore, that such 
has been the efifect. 

I owe it to my own character to make another observation. 
Had I ever known, or even suspected, that General Jackson beheved 
I had been sent to him by Mr. Clay or his friends, I should imme- 
diately have corrected his erroneous impression; and thus pre- 
vented the necessity for this most unpleasant explanation. When 
the editor of the United States Telegraph, on the I2th of October 
last, asked me by letter for information upon this subject, I 
promptly informed him by the returning mail, on the i6th of 
that month, that I had no authority from Mr. Clay, or his friends, 
to propose any terms to General Jackson, in relation to their votes, 
nor did I ever make any such proposition; and that I trusted 
I would be as incapable of becoming a messenger upon such an 
occasion, as it was known General Jackson would be to receive 
such a message. I have deemed it necessary to make this state- 
ment, in order to remove any misconception, which may have 
been occasioned by the publication in the Telegraph, of my letter 
to the editor, dated the nth ultimo. 

With another remark I shall close this communication. Be- 
fore I held the conversation with General Jackson, which I have 
detailed, I called upon Major Eaton, and requested him to ask 
General Jackson, whether he had ever declared, or intimated, 
that he would appoint Mr. Adams secretary of state, and ex- 
pressed a desire that the general should say, if consistent with the 
truth, that he did not intend to appoint him to that office. I be- 
lieved, that such a declaration would have a happy influence upon 
the election, and I endeavored to convince him, that such would 
be the effect. The conversation between us was not so full, 
as that with General Jackson. The major politely declined to 
comply with my request, and advised me to propound the question 
to the general myself, as I possessed a full share of his confidence. 

James Buchanan. 
Lancaster, 8th August, 1827. 



268 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

TO MR. INGHAM.' 

Lancaster 9 August 1827. 
Dear Sir/ 

Ere this can reach you — you will have seen General Jack- 
son's letter to the Public in which he has given up my name. It 
will at once strike you to be a most extraordinary production so 
far as I am concerned. My statement will appear in the Lan- 
caster Journal tomorrow which I shall send you. I have not 
suffered my feelings to get the better of my judgment but have 
stated the truth in a calm & temperate manner. If General Jack- 
son & our editors should act with discretion the storm may blow 
over without injury. Should they on the contrary force me 
to the wall & make it absolutely necessary for the preservation 
of my own character to defend myself, I know not what may 
be the consequence. 

I have stated the conversation between Markley & myself 
in as strong terms as the truth would justify; but no stronger. 
It is in your power to do much to give this matter a proper direc- 
tion. Indeed I would suggest to you the propriety of an imme- 
diate visit to Philadelphia for that purpose. My friends here are 
very indignant but I believe I can keep them right. 

You will perceive that General Jackson has cited Mr. Eaton 
as a witness. I have treated this part of his letter with great 
mildness. In a letter to me which I received the day before yes- 
terday — the General intimates that George Kremer would confirm 
his statement. This letter is an imprudent & in my opinion 
an improper one. It is well it has fallen into the hands of a 
political friend. 

You will discover that your knowledge concerning my con- 
versation with General Jackson was nearly correct. Tlie friend 
who wrote me the letter of the 27 Dec: 1824 referred to in my 
communication was Judge Rogers — then Secretary of State [of 
Pennsylvania]. 

from your sincere friend 

James Buchanan. 

Samuel D. Ingham Esq. 



^ Buchanan Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania. Also, Curtis's 
Buchanan, I. 54. 



1827] TO GENERx\L JACKSON 269 

TO GENERAL JACKSON.' 

Lancaster io August 1827. 

Dear Sir, 

I received your letter of the 15th ultimo on Tuesday last. 
Your address to the Public also reached nie upon the same day 
in the Cincinatti Advertiser. This communication made it neces- 
sary for me to publish in detail the conversation which I held 
with you, concerning the Presidential election on the 30 Decem- 
ber 1824. I shall enclose to you in this letter that part of the 
Lancaster Journal containing it. 

I regret beyond expression that you believed me to be an 
emissary from Mr. Clay. Since some time before the first Har- 
risburg Convention which nominated you, I have ever been your 
ardent, decided, and perhaps without vanity I may say, your 
efficient friend. Every person in this part of the state of Penn- 
sylvania is well acquainted with the fact. It is therefore to me a 
matter of the deepest regret that you should have supposed me 
to be " the friend of Mr. Clay." Had I ever entertained a sus- 
picion that such was your belief, I should have immediately cor- 
rected your impression. 

I shall annex to this letter a copy of that which I wrote to 
Duff Green, on the i6th October last.^ The person whom I con- 
sulted in Pennsylvania was the present Judge Rogers of the 
Supreme Court — then the Secretary of State of this Common- 
wealth. 

The friends of the administration are making great efforts 
in Pennsylvania. We have been busily engaged during the sum- 
mer in counteracting them. Success has I think hitherto attended 
our efforts. I do not fear the vote of the State, although it is 
believed every member of the State administration, except Gen- 
eral Bernard is hostile to your election. Your security will be 
in the gratitude in the hearts of the people. 

Please to present my best respects to Mrs. Jackson and 
believe me to be very 

respectfully your friend &c 

James Buchanan. 
General Andrew Jackson. 



'Jackson MSS., Library of Congress. Imperfectly printed in Curtis's 
Buchanan, I. 55. 
" Supra, p. 218. 



270 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

FROM DUFF GREEN/ 

Washington nth August 1827. 
Dear Sir 

I take the liberty to enclose you a letter from a gentleman of the first 
respectability at Lexington, Ky. which you will please to keep & return. This 
letter is sent you as an evidence of the friendly feeling which runs through 
the whole body of Gen. Jackson's friends. Several letters speak in much 
the same terms. 

Surrounded as you will be by the important consequences which must 
grow out of your letter you will excuse the solicitude I feel and the motive 
which prompts the liberty I have taken. Please to consider this letter as 
strictly confidential. 

Your friend 

D. Green. 

Your letter was published in order to produce the effect which I find it 
has produced upon the elections in Kentucky. I foresaw the importance of 
it and took the liberty so to use it. Your name was announced for the same 
reason. 



TO DUFF GREEN.^ 

Lancaster 17 August 1827. 
Dear Sir/ 

I have received yours of the 11 Instant enclosing me the 
letter of Mr. Richardson of Kentucky. I shall keep this letter 
according to your request until I see you & then return it; or if 
you so desire I will send it by Mail. 

I felt hurt at your publication of my private letter, nor can 
I approve the reasons which you have given for it in your last. 

I was pleased with your remarks in the last Telegraph upon 
the subject of my letter to the Editor of the Lancaster Journal. 
They were written with much ability, & generally speaking, con- 
tain my own sentiments. I am glad you have given so good a 
direction to the subject; & I trust the course which you have 
so clearly indicated may be followed by our Editors generally. 

You say, " it is whispered that the Coalition have thrown 
open their arms widely & hope to entice Mr. Buchanan to rush 
into their embrace. This he will not do." 

You were fully justified in the last sentence of this remark. 
No combination of circumstances can ever exist which will induce 
me to support Mr. Adams for the office of President. It may 



^ Buchanan Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania. 



1827] REMARKS ON PROTECTION 271 

become necessary in self defence for me again to appear before 
the Public, should General Jackson or Major Eaton reply to my 
statement. Nothing but necessity shall compel me to do so. In 
that event it is possible the cause of Gen : Jackson may be in- 
jured : otherwise the present storm will blow over without 
materially affecting it. 

I need not inform you this letter is not intended for publi- 
cation. From yr. obedient servant 

James Buchanan. 
General Duff Green. 



REMARKS, DECEMBER 31, 1827, 

ON THE PROTECTION OF DOMESTIC MANUFACTURES.^ 

Mr. Buchanan said, as my colleagues [Mr. Stevenson and 
Mr. Stewart] have expressed opinions directly at variance with 
each other, I shall state my reasons for the vote which I intend 
to give. I am in favor of the amendment proposed by the gen- 
tleman from New York [Mr. Oakley] ; not because it varies in 
principle from the resolution reported by the Committee of Manu- 
factures, but because it expresses more fully and distinctly the 
objects which that committee had in view. 

It has been stated and urged by gentlemen, in this debate, 
that the vote which may be given in favor of the resolution, ought 
to be considered as a vote against the policy of protecting domes- 
tic manufactures. I protest against any such inference. It is 
at war with the fact. It assumes the principle, that, because the 
friends of the resolution wish to cast all the light which can be 
shed upon the subject — because they wish to act with knowledge 
and deliberation — that, therefore, they are opposed to the pro- 
tection of domestic manufactures. It assumes the position that 
the desire to obtain information concerning a measure, necessarily 
pre-supposes hostility to it. This is a singular mode of argu- 
ment. I feel confident, that, when the House shall have acquired 



^ Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part i, pp. 875-877. 
A resolution having been reported that the Committee on Manufactures be 
empowered " to send for persons and papers," Mr. Oakley proposed to amend 
it by adding the words " with a view to ascertain and report to the House 
such facts as may be useful to guide the judgment of this House in relation 
to a revision of the tariff duties on imported goods." (Id. 862, 868.) 



272 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1827 

a knowledge of all the facts — and when they shall be spread 
before the nation, in an authentic form, we shall pass a bill much 
more satisfactory to ourselves and to our country, than we can 
do without the information. 

But, it has been stated that the delay which must follow the 
adoption of this resolution, will defeat the bill, at the present 
session. I have been astonished to hear this argument urged, 
after the explicit declaration of the Committee of Domestic 
Manufactures. One of its members [Mr. Stevenson] has 
solemnly declared, that delay has not been the object, nor will 
it be the effect of the measure. They have determined to report 
a bill during the next month, and hope they will be enabled to do 
so, some time before its close. After such a declaration upon 
this floor, will any gentleman again repeat, that the intention of 
the majority of the committee is delay? I trust not. Upon the 
ground of delay, therefore, there is no reason for voting against 
this resolution. Much as I desire more information concerning 
the manufacture of woollens, if I could, for one moment, believe, 
that the passage of this resolution would prevent us from acting 
efficiently upon the tariff, during the present session, I should vote 
in the negative. I apprehend no such result. 

Gentlemen have argued, that the power to send for persons 
to testify, which the respectable Committee of Manufactures de- 
sire to obtain from the House, is dangerous and unprecedented. 
What a mere bug-bear is this argument! If two of your citizens 
engage in litigation, no matter how contemptible the subject in 
dispute may be, your laws will compel the attendance of wit- 
nesses, whatever may be the individual sacrifice. Justice must 
be done between them. And shall it be said, that, when a meas- 
ure, deeply affecting the interest of every man in the United 
States, is before the Representatives of the People, that it is the 
exercise of extraordinary power, to compel the attendance of wit- 
nesses who can give us practical information upon the subject? 
This power has never before been questioned, since I have been 
a member of this House. 

For my own part, I am a sincere friend to the Tariff, and have 
no doubt that the manufacture of woollens requires additional 
protection : the great question is, in what degree ? We must know 
the extent of the evil, before we can proportion the remedy to 
It. Upon this subject, my principles have never changed. I have 
ever been in favor of affording such protection to our domestic 
manufactures, as will enable them to enter into fair and success- 



18^27] REMARKS ON PROTECTION 273 

ful competition with foreign manufactures, in our domestic mar- 
kets. If you go beyond this point, you reach prohibition; and 
thus afford an unnecessary and unjust protection to the manufac- 
turer, at the expense of the consumer. On the other hand, if 
you fall short of it, you disappoint the just hopes of the manu- 
facturer, and withdraw from him the foundation on which he 
has a right to expect that he shall stand. It is not easy to deter- 
mine the precise point to which we ought to go. To err on the 
one side, will injure the manufacturer — to err on the other, will 
injure the consumer. The woollen manufacturers themselves 
differ, as to the degree of protection necessary. How, then, can 
we decide between them, without calling them before us, and 
ascertaining the facts upon which their respective opinions rest? 
Aly colleague [Mr. Stewart] may know the precise degree of 
protection necessary. I confess I do not. Even the Committee 
of Domestic Manufactures are in the dark upon this subject. 

Who are the manufacturers, that we dare not approach them ? 
Shall we be so careful of their accommodation, that we must act 
l)lindly, rather than send for them to give us information ? Shall 
we run the risk of injuriously affecting the agricultural interest, 
and all the other interests of the country, rather than send for 
a few of those gentlemen who are our petitioners, to inform us 
as to the degree of protection which their establishments require? 
This would be ill-timed and injudicious kindness. If we send 
for them, their expenses must be paid by the House. It certainly 
cannot be a very grievous matter for them to spend a few days 
here, during the fashionable season, at the public expense, when 
so many of our citizens visit Washington voluntarily, at their 
own private cost. 

I confess I did not understand by what authority my col- 
league [Mr. Stewart] undertook to propound the questions which 
he has done to the Committee of Manufactures. They are not 
now upon their trial. They are not bound to answer such inter- 
rogatories. They have exposed their reasons for making this re- 
quest before you, and they merely wnsh to obtain your advice 
upon the subject. They will rest satisfied with whatever may be 
your determination. 

Before I sit down, I must say, I am glad that my colleague 
[Mr. Stewart] and myself at length agree upon the articles proper 
to be embraced in the Tariff. The abortive attempt which he 
made to amend this resolution, shews, that he is now willing to 
protect other interests besides those contained in the Woollen Bill 

18 



274 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

of the last Session. Since that period, new Hght, from some 
quarter, has beamed upon his mind ; and who can, therefore, tell, 
but that the information sought to be obtained by this resolution, 
may illumine the minds of others? At the last Session, when 
I proposed to include in the Woollen Bill several of the articles 
enumerated in the amendment which that gentleman has this day 
offered, he voted for the previous question, which was carried ; 
and thus my purpose was defeated. 

Mr. Buchanan here yielded the floor to Mr. Stewart. 

Mr. Stewart rose to explain. He had, at the last session, 
voted for every proposition the object of which was to protect 
either manufactures or agriculture. He had never voted against 
a Tariff question, and never would. He had never voted against 
a single proposition in any shape, which, in his judgment, was 
calculated to protect domestic industry. He had voted for the 
w'oollens bill of last session, not as being all that he wished, but 
as being all that he could get — and on this ground only. 

Mr. Buchanan said, I cannot be mistaken in the fact, that 
the gentleman [Mr. Stewart] did vote for the previous question, 
upon the occasion to which T have referred. It will be for the 
House and the country to decide, whether the explanation of that 
vote which he has now given, be satisfactory or not. 



1828. 
REMARKS AND MOTION, JANUARY 14, 1828, 

IN RELATION TO THE CUMBERLAND ROAD.' 

Mr. Buchanan rose, and said, that it would be recollected 
by many gentlemen upon this floor, that, at the last session of 
Congress, when the bill for the preservation and repair of the 
Cumberland R6ad, which provided for the erection of toll-gates 
within the jurisdiction of the States through which it passes, was 
before the House, the session was so far advanced, that time did 
not remain to discuss and settle the important principles which it 
contained. Some days after that bill had been reported, I pre- 
sented an amendment to it, which I gave notice I intended to 
offer, when it should come before the House for discussion. This 
amendment provided for the retrocession of the road to the States 



'Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part i, pp. 1004- 
1005. 



1828] COURT MARTIAL AT MOBILE 275 

through which it passes, upon condition that they should keep 
it in repair, and exact no more toll upon it than might be necessary 
for that purpose. 

As the Cumberland Road then required immediate repairs, 
there was a general understanding throughout the House, that 
a simple appropriation should pass for that purpose ; and that the 
decision of the question which would have arisen upon the bill, as 
reported, and upon the amendment which I had proposed, should 
be postponed until the present session. The same bill for the 
erection of toll-gates under the authority of Congress, which 
had been reported by the Committee of Roads and Canals, at the 
last session, has been again reported, at this Session, by the Com- 
mittee. For the purpose of bringing the whole subject fairly 
before the House, and of preventing any unnecessary delay, I, 
therefore, again present the amendment which I intended to offer, 
at the last session, and move that it may be printed; and I give 
notice that I shall offer it. when the bill for the preservation and 
repair of the Cumberland Road shall come before the House. 

Mr. Buchanan submitted to the House a paper containing 
an amendment to the bill for the preservation and repair of the 
Cumberland Road; which was ordered to be printed, and will 
be taken into consideration when that bill comes before the House. 



REMARKS, JANUARY 16, 1828, 

ON A RESOLUTION AS TO THE COURT MARTIAL HELD AT MOBILE, 

DECEMBER 5, 1814, FOR THE TRIAL OF CERTAIN 

TENNESSEE MILITIAMEN.> 

Mr. Buchanan said, he had an amendment to offer to the 
resolution, which would afford the gentleman from Kentucky 
[Mr. Wickliffe] time to examine and understand it, in its present 
form, as it had been modified by the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. 
Sloane.] He was pleased that such a resolution had been moved, 
because the subject had already excited much public interest; 
indeed, it had attracted the attention of the whole nation. He 
wished to have presented before the American People the docu- 
ments, and all the documents, which related to this transaction. 

It would seem, from the terms of the resolution, in its orig- 
inal form, that its intention was rather to implicate the then 



' Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part i, pp. 1031- 
1032. 



276 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

Governor of Tennessee than the distinguished individual who was 
now so conspicuously within the public view. Even in its present 
modified state, it does not embrace all the documents which it is 
proper we should obtain. The People of this country feel a deep 
interest in every thing which relates to the character and conduct 
of that individual. It was necessary, therefore, that the whole 
case should be brought before this House, and the public. [He 
then moved an amendment, which called for a copy of the order 
issued by Governor Blount to General Jackson.] 

Mr. B. said, he would state his reason for this motion. He 
had observed in the public papers, some time ago, a copy of the 
order issued by Governor Blount to General Jackson, in May. 
1814. If this copy were authentic — and he had no reason to 
doubt its authenticity — it would cast a blaze of light upon the 
subject. If any person could, by possibility, be implicated, it 
would be Gov. Blount, and not General Jackson. 

In that order, the Governor explicitly declares, that it was 
issued in compliance with the requisition of Major General Pinck- 
ney. It commanded General Jackson to order out one thousand 
men of the second division of Tennessee militia, for the term of 
six months, unless they should be sooner discharged by the Presi- 
dent of the United States. And it declared, that this latitude, 
in relation to the call, had been given by instructions from the 
War Department. It will be recollected, that General Jackson 
was, at that time, an officer in the militia, and not of the regular 
army. He w^as bound to obey this order of the Governor of his 
own State; and it could never have occurred to him to inquire 
whether that officer had lawful authority to issue it. especially 
when upon its face, it contained an express recital of such author- 
ity. If this order did issue, it will shew conclusively that, if 
there be any question in the case, it has an immediate bearing 
upon Gov. Blount, and not upon General Jackson. Mr. B. 
wished to have a copy of this order. No doubt the Governor 
had transmitted it to the War Department, under whose authority 
he had been acting. Mr. B. concluded by expressing a hope that 
the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Sloane] would accept his amend- 
ment as a modification of the resolution. 



1828] RETRENCHMENT 277 

REMARKS, JANUARY 23, 1828, 

ON RETRENCHMENT.! 

Mr. Buchanan said, he could not concur in opinion with the 
gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Barney] that no necessity for 
reform existed at the present time. On the contrary, I believe 
it is necessary that all the public expenditures should be subjected 
to a most rigid examination. That abuses do exist, which ought 
to be remedied, I do not entertain a particle of doubt. Whilst 
this is my deliberate conviction, I entirely concur with the gentle- 
man from Virginia [Mr. Randolph] that this is not the proper 
period for reform. Our duty at present, is, to transact the neces- 
sary public business of the countr>% and to go home as soon as 
we can. I will say, however, to the gentleman from Kentucky 
[Mr. Chilton] that whoever shall undertake the work of reform, 
cannot accomplish his purpose by such a resolution as that now 
before the House. He must go to work systematically. He 
must patiently and laboriously ferret out one abuse after the 
other, himself, instead of imposing that labor upon others. Such 
a task cannot be performed by referring a general — an unlimited 
and undefined resolution to the Committee of Ways and Means, 
at this period, when, I trust, half the session has elapsed. 

I should not have risen, upon the present occasion, to say one 
word, did I not believe that the duty which I owe to the Fifth 
Auditor of the Treasury imperiously demands of me to make 
an explanation of the duties which that officer performs. The 
gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Chilton] never could have inves- 
tigated the subject, when he informed the House, that office had 
been created for purposes which no longer exist. This office 
was created in March, 1817. Its duties originally consisted in 
auditing and settling all the accounts connected with the De- 
partment of State. These duties embraced all the accounts relat- 
ine to our intercourse with foreign nations. Since this office was 

o 

created, those duties must have been doubled. The independence 
of South America has since given birth to a new swarm of 
Foreign Ministers. Diplomatic Agents, and Consuls along the 
shores both of the Southern Atlantic and Pacific ocean. Their 
accounts must all be audited by this officer. 

The same observation is applicable to the accounts of the 
Post Office Department. This officer is the Auditor of all the 

^Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part i, pp. 1088- 
1090. 



278 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

accounts of all the Post Masters, and all the Mail Contractors, 
in the United States. The new energy infused into this De- 
partment, by the excellent officer now at its head, has greatly 
extended the duties of the Fifth Auditor. This, however, is far 
from being the aggregate of his services. He has been made a 
kind of residuary legatee, of all the duties which other officers 
of the Government could not conveniently perform. When the 
office of Commissioner of the Revenue was abolished, in 1819, 
the Fifth Auditor was designated by the Secretary of the Treas- 
ury to perform the duties of that office. Although, since that 
time, there have been no internal taxes to collect, yet those gentle- 
men who know how difficult it is to wind up an old concern, will 
readily believe that the duties imposed upon this officer have been 
nearly as arduous as they would have been, had internal taxation 
continued. This branch of his business has entailed upon him 
an extensive correspondence with all the Collectors in the United 
States, who have not finally closed their accounts — and the num- 
ber of such, even at this day, is not small. But the most extra- 
ordinary of all the duties which has been imposed upon this officer, 
is that which the President of the United States devolved upon 
him in 1821. Although never bred to the laws, yet he was 
appointed to discharge duties which strictly and properly belong 
to the office of Attorney General of the United States. Ever 
since that time, he has directed and superintended all the law 
suits, throughout the Union, in which the Government have been 
concerned; and, at the present moment, the United States have 
upwards three thousand law suits depending. 

To show the extent and the arduous nature of this duty, I 
would remark, that the then Secretary of the Treasury, who was 
never suspected of a want of proper economy — an officer upon the 
purity and wisdom of whose official conduct the People of this 
country have passed, and who is now revered in his retirement 
by every patriot, recommended that a person should be appointed 
for the sole purpose of attending to these suits, with a salary 
of $2,500 per annum. 

If, therefore, there be any one officer in this Government, 
whom the gentleman from Kentucky ought not to have desig- 
nated as useless, that officer is the Fifth Auditor of the Treasury. 
I am just now reminded by gentlemen around me, that this 
officer, in addition to other burdens imposed upon him. has the 
charge of all the light houses in the United States. 



1828] RETRENCHMENT 279 

I have a word to say to the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. 
Barney] before I take my seat. I am prepared at this time, and 
at all times, to act upon the subject of reducing our own pay. 
In relation to this question, I formed a deliberate opinion six 
years ago, which my experience ever since has served to 
strengthen and confirm, that the per diem allowance of members 
of Congress ought to be reduced. As a compensation for our 
loss of time, it is at present wholly inadequate. There is no gen- 
tleman fit to be in Congress, who pursues any active business at 
home, who does not sustain a clear loss by his attendance here. 
If we consider our pay, with reference to our necessary individual 
expenses, it is too much. It is more than sufficient to cover 
our expenses. I believe that the best interests of the country 
require that it should be reduced to a sum no more than sufficient 
to enable us to live comfortably whilst we are here. For my own 
part, I do not, like the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Barney] 
give away to my constituents my per diem allowance. I receive 
it, and use it for my own benefit. It seems that gentleman uses 
the surplus of his pay,* in displaying his liberality to his con- 
stituents ; by making donations to churches and charitable institu- 
tions at the public expense. In this manner he may use it most 
effectually for his own advantage; but still I am inclined to be- 
lieve, his constituents, as well as mine, would be quite as well 
satisfied, if the surplus were allowed to remain in the Treasury, 
for the benefit of the Nation. If the Government of this country 
should ever want to employ almoners to distribute their bounty, 
the last men whom the People should desire to employ in this 
office, would be members of Congress. It might be dangerous to 
trust them with the performance of such a duty. 

Upon the whole I scarcely know how to vote upon the pres- 
ent question. If the Chairman, or any gentleman upon the Com- 
mittee of Ways and Means, to whom this resolution is directed, 
will say there is any prospect that it may be productive of good, 
during the present session, I shall vote in the affirmative. If not, 
I shall vote in the negative. When we commence the work of 
reform, I wish to enter upon it seriously. I wish the House to 
be prepared to act with wisdom and with energy, in cutting off 
the useless branches of public expenditure. Until that time shall 
arrive, I do not wish to encourage hopes which cannot be realized. 



280 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

REMARKS, JANUARY 24, 1828, 

ON RETRENCHMENT.! 

Mr. Buchanan said, that, if the House should determine to 
adopt any resolution on the subject of reform, at the present time, 
it ought to contain a distinct proposition, that it was expedient 
to discharge the national debt as soon as possible. For this 
reason, he could not vote for the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New- York, [Mr. Taylor.] When that gentle- 
man moved an amendment, which, if it should prevail, would 
strike out all that part of the original resolution which related to 
the extinguishment of the public debt, he expected to hear some 
reasons urged for such an omission. In this he had been dis- 
appointed. 

Sir, said Mr. B. I know it has become very fashionable in 
the present day, to say, that we are discharging the public debt 
too rapidly. Many deplore that it is melting away so fast : and 
although it has not been openly avowed that a public debt is a 
public blessing, yet such is the necessary tendency of the remarks 
which we often hear. Upon this subject, I beg the House to 
recur to the past history of the country. What was the amount 
of our debt before the late war? It had been so much reduced, 
that a very wise and a very great statesman felt himself at a loss 
to know how our surplus revenue could be expended, after the 
debt should be entirely extinguished. To accomplish this pur- 
pose, amendments to the Constitution were recommended. But 
war came; and in less than three years, the public debt increased 
from forty-five to one hundred and twenty millions of dollars. 
It was a maxim of the Father of his Country, that, in peace it 
was our duty to prepare for war. How can we better prepare, 
than by paying our debts? According to the system which has 
been pursued by this Government from its origin, we have, com- 
paratively speaking, no resource left, in time of war, but a resort 
to loans. They and they alone, must support our credit in the 
day of trial; and yet this resource had nearly been exhausted 
before the close of the last war. What has once been, experience 
teaches us may be again. A war, by injuring our foreign trade, 
would cut off many of the sources of our revenue, and we should 
be compelled again immediately to resort to loans. I wish, then. 

* Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part i, pp. 1136- 
II 38. 



1828] RETRENCHMENT 281 

if possible, to be clear of debt when another war shall commence. 
Our debt, reduced as it has been, is still much larger than it was 
at the declaration of the late war. A future war would, in a very 
few years, raise it higher than it ever has been. I am, therefore, 
in favor of husbanding all our resources, and applying the whole 
surplus, not absolutely necessary for other objects, to the extin- 
guishment of the national debt. If, therefore, we shall pass the 
resolution, I trust that this object will stand in the front rank. 

I know that the process of extinguishing the debt has been 
rapidly advancing for several years, and I do not complain that the 
present administration have not fairly applied the sinking fund to 
this purpose. Although I do not pretend to be their friend, yet 
I am willing to admit they have gone on to carry into effect the 
law creating that fund, which was so wisely enacted by our 
predecessors. This rapid extinguishment of the public debt has 
been productive of much good to the country. Among other 
benefits, it has essentially promoted domestic manufactures, by 
forcing capital into that channel of business, which would never 
have been thus employed, could it have remained in the public 
stock. I shall vote for no amendment which shall not embrace, 
in distinct terms, the position that the public debt ought to be 
extinguished as speedily as possible. 

Mr. B. said he would reply in a few words to his friend from 
Maryland [Mr. Barney.] He reciprocated the term friend, 
because he believed he could do so towards that gentleman with 
propriety. Said Mr. B., when I expressed myself friendly to the 
reduction of our own per diem allowance, I trust neither that 
gentleman, nor any other upon this floor, attributed my remarks 
to the grovelling and selfish desire of courting popularity. The 
people of this country are too clear-sighted and too intelligent 
to be deceived by such pretences. I here distinctly avow, that the 
saving of money to the public treasury was far from being the 
chief reason which influenced my mind in arriving at the con- 
clusion that our per diem should be reduced. I firmly believe that 
my own constituents would not regard it a single straw, whether 
I should vote for eight or for four dollars per day. My motive 
was of a higher nature. My remarks, I trust, sprung from a 
nobler source. If the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. 
Culpeper] had reasoned upon the fact which he stated, and had 
drawm the fair deduction from it, he would, I think feel the force 
of the remarks which I intend to make. He says that but one 
bill has passed into a law during the present session, and that one 



282 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

is a bill providing for the pay of the members of Congress. I 
would ask that gentleman, why is this the case? Why has not 
more business been done? If he had asked himself these ques- 
tions, he would probably have discovered the true origin of my 
remarks. I wish to speak with all due deference to the members 
of this House, when I say it is my desire, by reducing our 
wages, to make it our interest, as well as our duty, to do 
the business of the country as it arises, and go home as 
soon as possible. I do not wish to be in a hurry — I do not wish 
to act without due deliberation; and yet, I firmly believe that 
the public business might be better transacted than it is at present, 
in little more than half the period of our long sessions. I do not 
profess to be " an aged gentleman; " but yet, upon this subject. 
I can speak in the language of experience, and am glad that there 
are many gentlemen around me who can correct me if I should 
fall into error. I would ask, what has been the course of legis- 
lation which we have heretofore pursued? What have we done 
during the first half of every long session ? I answer, compara- 
tively nothing. The fact stated by the gentleman from North 
Carolina, [Mr. Culpeper] in regard to the business which has 
been transacted during the present session, is substantially true of 
those that are past. But I do not complain of the waste of time 
alone. The necessary consequence of this manner of proceeding 
is to force the whole business of the session in a solid mass upon 
the House near its close. Then we have so much to do, that we 
can do nothing well. There is neither time nor opportunity for 
investigation ; and measures are adopted, the nature and charac- 
ter of which cannot be understood by the House. Immediately 
before the close of the session, we are employed in passing bills 
until 12, I, 2, and 3 o'clock in the morning. I have been upon 
this floor at a late period of the night, when important amend- 
ments were arriving every few minutes from the Senate, which 
were adopted, when, I believe, there were not more than thirty or 
forty members present. T do know that it was then in the power 
of any individual, by merely calling for a division, to defeat any 
of these measures. This would have furnished official infor- 
mation to the Speaker that a quorum v/as not present, and then no 
business could have proceeded. 

When the spirit of reform is abroad, I wish to try the experi 
ment, whether we should not do more business, and do it better, 
in a shorter time, if our pay were less. I say we, because I am 
conscious that T like money quite as well, and have been quite as 



1828] RETRENCHMENT 283 

much to blame, as other members. As to the saving of a few 
dollars per day, out of the pay of each member, to the People 
of the United States, they disregard it, and, in that view of the 
subject, I disregard it. I concur with the gentleman from Mary- 
land, in believing it to be small game. If its tendency, however, 
should be, as I believe it would, to direct our attention more ear- 
nestly to the public business of the country, and to induce us to 
apply ourselves more industriously to discharge it, the effect 
would be happy. I did not wish, at the present time, to be drawn 
out into this explanation. It, however, became necessary. Hav- 
ing done so, I can now utterly disclaim the idea, that I was urged 
to the performance of this duty by any desire to obtain popularity, 
which, if it rested upon no other foundation, would be fleeting 
in its nature, and would not be worth possessing by any honorable 
man. 

The gentleman from Maryland asks why I had not, ere this, 
made a motion to reduce our wages, as I had long been thor- 
oughly convinced of its propriety? I answer that I have not now 
made such a motion; I have merely expressed my opinion. I 
have not set myself up as a reformer of every abuse which I see 
here. To become a reformer in this Government, I fear would 
be a most troublesome, thankless, and hopeless task, particularly 
if the first blow should be directed against ourselves. If I had 
made any motion upon the subject, which I intend to do at a 
proper time. I might answer him, in the language of the homely 
proverb, " better late than never." 



REMARKS, JANUARY 26, 1828, 

ON RETRENCHMENT.' 

Mr. Buchanan said, I do not rise to prolong this debate, by 
entering into a general discussion of the subject. Sufficient time 
has already been wasted upon it. When it was first introduced 
to the House by the gentleman from Kentucky, I did not antici- 
pate that it could have occupied so much of our time as it has 
already done. 

My single purpose, at this time, is to notice an observation 
which was made yesterday, by the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. 



^Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part i, pp. 1189- 
1191. 



284 



THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 



Wright] in relation to the Committee of Domestic Manufactures. 
This task I should not have undertaken, had the members of that 
committee been present in the House, either yesterday or to-day ; 
because, we all know they are perfectly able to defend themselves. 
It is well known that they now are, and for a considerable period 
they have been, absent from the House, by leave, discharging 
the arduous and important duties which the House have thought 
proper to impose upon them. If the gentleman from Ohio had 
recollected this fact, he surely ought not have made the remark 
which he did. 

The gentleman, in reply to a remark made upon this floor, 
said, he feared there was no danger that we should have a tariff 
forced upon us during the present session. That we had not yet 
heard any thing from the Committee of Manufactures, and his 
constituents feared we should not hear from them during the 
present year. The gentleman evidently intended to convey the 
idea to this House, and to the nation, that the committee were 
opposed to the great interest intrusted to their care, and wished 
to defeat the passage of any tariff during the present session. I 
ask what evidence is there, to justify the remark of that gentle- 
man? When the House gave the Committee of Manufactures 
the power to send for and examine witnesses, one of the members 
of that committee distinctly declared, upon this floor, that they 
would report during the present month. The gentleman ought, 
therefore, in common justice, to have waited at least until the 
close of the month, before he began to complain. It will be 
time enough to charge the committee with neglect, when the 
period shall have elapsed, within which they avowed their inten- 
tion to make a report. 

I will inform the gentleman, that the members of that com- 
mittee have faithfully and industriously devoted themselves to 
the performance of their duty. Their labor has been almost 
incessant. They have for some time been occupied not only dur- 
ing the whole day, but a great part of the night, in examining 
witnesses. When they shall make a report to this House, it will 
be one resting upon facts, not upon vague and contradictory opin- 
ions. It will convince all. that the House acted wisely in granting 
that committee power to send for persons. For my own part. 
I am firmly convinced, that the facts which the committee have 
collected, instead of retarding, will greatly expedite the passage 
of a wise and judicious tariff. They will serve to conciliate the 
enemies of the system, by furnishing them with convincing testi- 



1828] RETRENCHMENT 285 

mony, that domestic manufactures really do require additional 
protection. I have no doubt such a bill will be reported, as shall 
unite the gentleman from Ohio and myself in its support; 
although, during the present session, we have stood in opposition 
to each other, upon almost every other question. Upon this 
occasion, I shall be glad to embark with him in the same vessel. 
and I trust we shall have a prosperous voyage. 

As the House appears determined to pass some resolution 
upon the subject now before them, I shall take the liberty of 
making a suggestion in relation to the Military Academy at West 
Point. It is chiefly intended for the committee who may have 
charge of the resolution. 

I cannot agree with some of the gentlemen who have ad- 
dressed the House, that the Military Academy should be abolished. 
On the contrary, this Government, possessing the power of mak- 
ing war, and being under a solemn obligation to provide for the 
common defence, owe it to themselves and to the People of this 
country, to furnish them with the means of military instruction. 
War, especially in modern times, has become an art. nay a science, 
so extensive and so complex in its nature, that its theory can 
only be acquired after years of application. A Military Academy 
is the best plan which has ever yet been devised of communi- 
cating military instruction. It is true that a few men. of bril- 
liant genius, have appeared in the world, who. without a military 
education, by mere intuition, have excelled in the art of war. 
These splendid exceptions ought not to detract from the general 
rule that a military education is necessary to make a skilful and 
efficient officer. 

Gentlemen have complained, and I believe with justice, that 
there now are several supernumerary Cadets. I would suggest 
the source of this evil to be, that the Military Academy is too 
large for the Army — or. any gentleman will have it so, the Army 
is too small for the Military Academy. A just proportion does 
not exist between them. The supply of officers which the Acad- 
emy furnishes is too great for the demand of an army not 
amounting to 6.000 men. This state of things gives birth to 
another evil. No man who now enlists as a private soldier in 
the Army, no matter what may be his capacity, or what may be 
his conduct, can ever expect to be promoted above the rank of 
a petty officer. He can never indulge the hope, which the policy 
and the practice of the wisest nations have sanctioned, that he may 
one day become a general officer. Every avenue to promotion is 



286 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

closed against him by the graduates at West Point, who always 
have the preference, and are more than sufficient to furnish the 
army with officers. 

Whether the Government, in addition to furnishing the 
means of a militar}^ education, ought to feed, and clothe, and pay 
the Cadets, whilst they are receiving it, is a question well worthy 
of the attention of the committee to whom this subject may be 
referred. One thing is certain, that, whatever other sins may be 
fairly chargeable against the present Administration, they cannot 
be justly chargeable with the establishment of the Military 
Academy. 



SPEECH, FEBRUARY 4, 1828, 

ON RETRENCHMENT.' 

Mr. Buchanan rose, and said, perhaps it would be vain to 
inquire by whom this debate was introduced. It is certain that 
we have now got into it, and no gentleman can predict when it will 
close. I cannot agree with the gentleman from Massachusetts, 
[Mr. Everett] that the Opposition are justly chargeable with its 
introduction in the party form which it has assumed, nor for its 
protracted character. My friend from Kentucky, [Mr. Letcher] 
has truly stated, what would have been the probable course of the 
resolutions, had it not been for the interference of the gentleman 
from Maryland, [Mr. Barney.] The mover of them, who is a 
young member of the House, would have made a speech in favor 
of their passage, and they would then have rested quietly with 
the numberless resolutions which have gone before them. The 
gentleman from Maryland, however, opposed their passage, 
upon the ground that no cause existed even to suspect the present 
Administration of any abuses. From that moment the debate 
assumed a party complexion. 

This debate would have ended on Tluirsday last, after the 
solemn appeal for that purpose, which was made to the House by 
the venerable gentleman from Louisiana, [Mr. Livingston] had 
not the gentleman from Massachusetts himself prevented it, by 
moving an adjournment. That gentleman ought to know, that 
he can never throw himself into any debate, without giving it 
fresh vigor and importance. 



' Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part i, pp. 1360- 



1828] SPEECH ON RETRENCHMENT 287 

It is true that a single straggler from the ranks of the Oppo- 
sition introduced these resolutions, but without the least inten- 
tion of bringing on a general engagement. When he was 
attacked, he defended himself in gallant style, and we were 
obliged both by duty and by policy to sustain him. It is for 
that purpose I have risen. The gentleman from Massachusetts, 
[Mr. Everett] and my friend and colleague from Pennsylvania, 
[Mr. Sergeant] have entirely changed the character of the de- 
bate, and have gone into an elaborate vindication of the present 
Administration. It is my purpose to reply to their arguments. 

My colleague commenced his remarks, by assigning several 
reasons why he would not have offered the resolutions which had 
been submitted to the House by the gentleman from Kentucky, 
[Mr. Chilton.] Against these reasons, with one exception, I 
have no complaint to make. My colleague has declared, that he 
would not have introduced such resolutions, because they might 
tend to injure the Government of the country, in the estimation 
of the People. Against this position I take leave to enter my 
solemn protest. Is it the Republican doctrine? What, sir, are 
we to be told that we shall not inquire into the existence of 
abuses in this Government, because such an inquiry might tend 
to make the Government less popular? This is new doctrine 
to me — doctrine which I have never heard before upon this floor. 

Liberty, sir, is a precious gift, which can never long be 
enjoyed by any People, without the most watchful jealousy. It 
is Hesperian fruit, which the ever-wakeful jealousy of the People 
can alone preserve. The very possession of power has a strong — 
a natural tendency, to corrupt the heart. The lust of dominion 
grows with its possession; and the man who, in humble life, was 
pure, and innocent, and just, has often been transformed, by 
the long possession of power, into a monster. In the Sacred 
Book, which contains lessons in wisdom for the politician, as 
well as for the Christian, we find a happy illustration of the cor- 
rupting influence of power upon the human heart. When 
Hazael came to consult Elisha, whether his master, the King of 
Syria, would recover from a dangerous illness, the prophet, 
looking through a vista of futurity, saw the crimes of which the 
messenger who stood before him would be guilty, and he wept. 
Hazael asked, why weepeth my Lord? The prophet then re- 
counted to him, the murders and the cruelties of which he should 
be guilty, towards the children of Israel. Hazael, in the spirit 
of virtuous indignation, replied — Is thy servant a dog that he 



288 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

should do this thing? "And Elisha answered, the Lord hath 
shewed me, that thou shalt be king over Syria." This man 
afterwards became king, by the murder of his master, and was 
guihy of enormities, the bare recital of which would make us 
shudder. 

The nature of man is the same under Republics and under 
Monarchies. The history of the human race proves, that liberty 
can never long be preserved, without popular jealousy. It is the 
condition of its enjoyment. Our rulers must be narrowly watched. 
When my colleague advanced the position which he did, he could 
not have foreseen the consequences to which his doctrine would 
lead. I know that he never could have intended that it should 
reach thus far; but yet my inference is perfectly fair, when I 
declare it is a doctrine which only suits the calm of despotism. 
It is the maxim of despots, that the People should never inquire 
into the concerns of Government. Those who have enslaved 
mankind, from Caesar to Bonaparte, have always endeavored, 
by presenting them with amusements, and by every other means 
in their power, to attract the attention of the People from the 
conduct of their rulers. I therefore differ, toto caelo, from my 
colleague upon this point. If the resolutions of the gentleman 
from Kentucky, [Mr. Chilton] shall have the effect of more ear- 
nestly and more closely directing the attention of the People to 
the concerns of the Government, the result will be most fortunate. 
If the Government has been administered upon correct principles, 
an intelligent People will do justice to their rulers; if not, they 
will take care that every abuse shall be corrected. 

My colleague used an argument, for the purpose of sustain- 
ing the present Administration, which I should not have expected 
from that quarter. He has stated that, since the year 1816, the 
national debt has been reduced, from 126 to 66 millions of dol- 
lars. This is very true; and from the argument of the gentle- 
man, one who was ignorant of the subject might be induced to 
believe, that a large portion of this reduction may be fairly 
attributed to the present Administration. He evidently endeav- 
ored to make this impression upon the House. 

I would ask the gentleman what agency had the present 
Administration — nay, w^iat agency could they possibly have had, 
in the reduction of the public debt? Are they entitled to the least 
credit upon that account? Certainly not. It was a subject over 
w'hich they had no control. The laws which brought the revenue 
into the Treasury, out of which the debt was paid, existed long 



18^8] SPEECH ON RETRENCHMENT 289 

before they came into existence. Commerce wafted into our 
ports wealth from all nations, and the duties which were col- 
lected on the importation of foreign merchandise, they were 
bound to apply to the extinguishment of the demands which 
existed against the country. The Administration only did that, 
which they could not have avoided doing. The money flowed 
into the Treasury without their agency, and they applied that 
portion of it which they were bound by law to apply, to the ex- 
tinguishment of the public debt. I have hitherto admitted that 
they applied it fairly. The ancient British monarch, who, to 
show his People the impotence of human power, commanded the 
tides of the ocean not to flow, had no more authority over the 
laws of nature, than the present Administration could have had, 
in preventing the tide of wealth, out of which the public debt 
has been reduced, from flowing into the country. Men can 
never be entitled to credit for doing that which they could not 
have avoided. The praise, therefore, which the gentleman wishes 
to bestow upon the present Administration, for paying the 
national debt, is certainly not their due. 

It is true that, in times like the present, the Republic is always 
most in danger. When the clouds of adversity are lowering over 
the country, and when direct taxation becomes necessary for the 
support of the Government, the People are watchful and jealous, 
and will then attend strictly to their own concerns. It is in the 
halcyon days of peace and prosperity, when the jealousy of the 
People slumbers, that abuses are most likely to steal into the ad- 
ministration of your Government. I charge not the present Ad- 
ministration with corruption; but I do most solemnly believe, 
that several of their measures have had a strong tendency towards 
it. I thank Heaven that, in these days, a " Military Chieftain " 
has arisen, whose name is familiar to the lips of even the most 
humble citizen of this country, because his services live in their 
hearts, who will be able, by the suffrages of the People, to wrest 
the power of this Government from the hands of its present pos- 
sessors. No one else could, at this time, have successfully 
opposed the immense patronage and power of the Administration. 

I think I have shown, that the present Administration have 
not the least claim to merit, for the payment of the public debt. 
It is a claim which has no foundation upon which to rest. It is 
one of the splendid generalities to which my colleague has re- 
sorted, which, when you come to examine minutely, vanishes from 
the touch. 

19 



;290 



THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 



1 shall now leave my colleague from Pennsylvania, but with 
the intention of returning to him, after I shall have disposed of 
some of the arguments of the gentleman from Massachusetts, 
[Mr. Everett.] Before, however I commence my reply to that 
gentleman, I beg leave to make a few observations upon the last 
l^residential election. I shall purposely pass over every charge 
which has been made, that it was accomplished by bargain and 
sale, or by actual corruption. If that were the case, I have no 
knowledge of the fact ; and shall therefore say nothing about it. 
I shall argue this question as though no such charges had ever 
been made. So far as it regards the conduct which the people 
of the United States ought to pursue, at the approaching election. 
I agree entirely with the eloquent gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. 
Randolph] (I cannot with propriety call him my friend,) that it 
can make no difference whether a bargain existed or not. Nay, 
in some aspects in which the subject may be viewed, the danger 
to the People would be the greater, if no corruption had existed. 
It is true, that this circumstance ought greatly to influence our 
individual opinions of the men who now wield the destinies of 
the Republic; but yet the precedent would be at least equally 
dangerous, in the one case, as in the other. If flagrant and gross 
corruption had existed, every honest man would start from it with 
instinctive horror, and the People would indignantly hurl those 
men from the seats of power, who had thus betrayed their dearest 
interests. If the election were pure, there is, therefore, the 
greater danger in the precedent. I believe, in my soul, that the 
precedent which was established at the last Presidential election, 
ought to be reversed by the People, and this is one of my princi- 
pal reasons for opposing the re-election of the present Chief 
Magistrate. 

Let us examine this subject more closely. General Jackson 
was returned by the People of this country to the House of 
Representatives, with a plurality of electoral votes. The distin- 
guished individual who is now the Secretary of State, was then 
the Speaker of this House. It is perfectly well known, that, with- 
out his vote and influence, Mr. Adams could not have been elected 
President. After the election, we beheld that distinguished in- 
dividual, and no man in the United States witnessed the spectacle 
with more regret than I did. descending — yes, sir, I say descend- 
ing — from the elevated station which you now occupy, into the 
cabinet of the President whom he had elected. 

" Quantum mutatiis ah illo." 



1828] SPEECH ON RETRENCHMENT 291 

In the midnight of danger, during the darkest period of the 
late war, " his thrilling trump had cheered the land." Although 
among the great men of that day there was no acknowledged 
leader upon this floor, yet I have been informed, upon tlie best 
authority, that he was " primus inter pares/' I did wish, at a 
future time, to see him elevated still higher. I am one of the 
last men in the country who could triumph over his fallen for- 
tunes. Should he ever return to what I believe to be correct 
political principles, I shall willingly fight in the same ranks with 
him as a companion — nay, after a short probation, I should will- 
ingly acknowledge him as a leader. What brilliant prospects 
has that man not sacrificed ! 

This precedent, should it be confirmed by the People at the 
next election, will be one of most dangerous character to the 
Republic. The election of President must, I fear, often devolve 
upon this House. We have but little reason to expect, that any 
amendment, in relation to this subject, will be made to the Con- 
stitution in our day. There are so many conflicting interests to 
reconcile, so many powers to balance, that, when we consider the 
large majority in each branch of Congress, and the still larger 
majority of States, required to amend the Constitution, the pros- 
pect of any change is almost hopeless. I believe it will long 
remain just as it is. What an example, then, will this precedent, 
in the pure age of the Republic, present to future times! The 
People owe it to themselves, if the election must devolve upon this 
House, never to sanction the principle that one of its members 
may accept, from the person whom he has elected, any high office, 
much less the highest in his gift. Such a principle, if once 
established, must, in the end, destroy the purity of this House, 
and convert it into a corrupt electoral conclave. If the individual 
to whom I have alluded, could elect a President, and receive 
from him the office of Secretary of State, from the purest 
motives, other men may, and hereafter will, pursue the same 
policy, from the most corrupt. " If they do these things in the 
gi-een tree, what shall be done in the dry? " This precedent will 
become a cover, under which future bargains and corrupt combin- 
ations will be sanctioned; under which the spirit of the Consti- 
tution will be sacrificed to its letter. 

I shall now, Mr. Speaker, enter upon a more particular reply 
to the arguments of the gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. 
Everett.] I wish I were able to follow the example of the gen- 
tleman from Virginia, [Mr. Randolph] and to take the general 



292 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

and comprehensive views of political subjects, which he recom- 
mended. As I cannot pursue that course, I must enter into 
detail, and make such a speech as he would attribute to a lawyer. 
What was the first important act of the present xAdministra- 
tion? No, not the first, but the first after that message which 
certainly partook much more of the spirit of the " Statesman of 
40 years," who had been bred in foreign courts, than that of the 
plain simple American Republican. The President claimed the 
power, and mere courtesy prevented him from exercising it, of 
commissioning ministers to attend the Congress of Panama, 
without " the advice and consent of the Senate." My friend 
from North Carolina, [Mr. Carson] was, in my opinion, correct, 
when he declared, that one of the first important acts of the Presi- 
dent had been, to claim a power in direct violation of the Con- 
stitution. That instrument declares, that the President " shall 
nominate, and, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, 
shall appoint, ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls, 
judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United 
States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided 
for, and which shall be established by law." This is a clear, 
plain provision. Upon what authority, then, did the President 
claim the right to send Ministers to this Congress, without the 
consent of the Senate? The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. 
Everett] has answered the question, and has sustained this claim 
of power, by a most novel argument. He has read to us the 
act of Congress, of July i, 1790, which provides, "that the 
President of the United States shall be, and he hereby is, author- 
ized to draw from the Treasury of the United States, a sum not 
exceeding forty thousand dollars, annually, to be paid out of the 
moneys arising from the duties on imports and tonnage for the 
support of such persons as he shall commission to serve the United 
States in foreign parts, and for the expense incident to the busi- 
ness in which they may be employed." How commission? 
Without the advice and consent of the Senate ? Certainly not ; 
unless you can suppose that the very first Congress under the 
Constitution, deliberately intended to destroy the power which the 
Constitution had wisely conferred upon the Senate. The lan- 
guage of the act of Congress is perfectly consistent with the power 
of the Senate; because the President does, in fact, always com- 
mission public Ministers and other officers of the Government, 
after the Senate have advised and consented to their appointment. 
This phraseology was continued, in the several acts providing 



1828] SPEECH ON RETRENCHMENT 293 

the means of intercourse between the United States and foreign 
nations, until the year 1800, when the act of the 19th of March. 
1798, the last in which it had been used, was suffered to expire. 
Since that time, no such expression has ever been introduced 
into any of the subsequent acts. And yet this phrase, which had 
been employed in acts that have long- ceased to exist, was laid 
hold of by the President to justify this extraordinary claim of 
power. Whilst it affords no ground for his justification, it shows 
how desirous men in power are to lay hold of every pretext, 
no matter how trifling, to extend their authority. This is a law 
of nature, which can never be abolished by any law of man. 
It proves, conclusively, the wisdom and the necessity of watching 
over our rulers, with a jealous eye. 

I shall now proceed to assail another position of the gentle- 
man from Massachusetts, [Mr. Everett.] He argued against 
including in the resolutions before the House the contingent ex- 
penses of foreign intercourse. The gentleman shakes his head. 
He certainly did say, that it looked like trenching upon the pre- 
rogatives of the Executive. The gentleman believes that the 
expenditure of the contingent fund for foreign intercourse, is a 
prominent point before the House. I think so too. 

The application of this entire fund is left to the sound dis- 
cretion of the Executive, and is to be accounted for at the 
Treasury, in a two-fold manner. It is his duty to account 
specially, and produce regular vouchers, " in all instances, where- 
in the expenditure thereof may, in his judgment, be made public." 
When that is not the case, he settles the account, " by making a 
certificate of the amount of such expenditures as he may think 
it advisable not to specify." This last is called the secret ser- 
vice money. This is the distinction between the two portions of 
the fund. It is necessary for the good of the People, that the 
manner in which the secret service money is expended, should 
not be made public. If the names of those persons to whom it 
is given were not kept secret, the Government, in times of peril, 
might be prevented from getting important information, Avhich 
they could otherwise obtain. But, Mr. Speaker, give me the 
Administration which requires but little secret service money, 
especially in time of peace. Indeed, I am inclined to believe, 
that none is then necessary. A Republican Government ought 
to be open in its conduct, and have as few secrets as possible. 
Upon one occasion, Jefferson returned the entire contingent fund, 
which had been appropriated for foreign intercourse, untouched. 



294 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

I am just informed by the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. Ran- 
dolph] that Washington did the same. These are examples well 
worthy of imitation in our day. 

I do not wish to know the manner in which the present 
Administration have applied the secret service money. I shall 
never knowingly invade a single right which belongs to the Exec- 
utive. These resolutions contain no such principle ; but one great 
reason, why they have found any favor in my eyes, is, that I wish 
to ascertain the aggregate amount, not the items, of the secret 
service money which has been expended since the present Admin- 
istration came into power, and I wish to have a special account 
laid before this House, of the manner in which the residue of the 
contingent fund for foreign intercourse has been expended. This 
will be an invasion of no prerogative which belongs to the 
President. 

I now approach the main argument of the gentleman from 
Massachusetts, [Mr. Everett] and in the commencement, I shall 
lay down a position broadly, which I believe I shall be able to 
prove conclusively — that the President of the United States 
did receive an outfit of $9000, whilst he was a Minister abroad, 
in direct and palpable violation of a law of the United States; 
and that at this day he retains in his pocket one-half of that sum, 
in opposition to the declared opinion of the Congress of the United 
States. If I shall not establish this proposition, I have never 
been more mistaken in my life. 

In relation to outfits to be granted to public Ministers, all 
the acts of Congress which preceded that of the ist May, 18 10, 
spoke the same language. The gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Everett] gave us an historical sketch of these laws; but. 
as they are all the same in regard to the question I am now about 
to argue, I shall only refer to the act of the loth May, 1800. 
It was that act, which ascertained the compensation of public 
Ministers, from its date, until it was repealed by the act of ist 
May, 1 8 TO. I shall read its first section. 

" Be it enacted, &c. That exclusive of an outfit, which shall, in no case, 
exceed the amount of one year's salary to any Minister Plenipotentiary, or 
Charge des Affaires, to whom the same may be allowed, the President of 
the United States shall not allow to any Minister Plenipotentiary a greater 
sum than at the rate of nine thousand dollars per annum, as a compensation 
for all his services and expenses : nor a greater sum for the same, than four 
thousand five hundred dollars per annum to a Charge des Affaires ; nor a 
greater sum for the same than one thousand three hundred and fifty dollars 
per annum to the Secretary of any Minister Plenipotentiary." 



1828] SPEECH ON RETRENCHMENT 295 

From the origin of the government, until the year 1810, 
the President clearly had the right to allow an outfit to a Minis- 
ter, whom he might think proper to transfer from one European 
Court to another. The language of the act of 1800, and of the 
previous acts, is general and indefinite. Whether they would 
have justified him in making such an allowance, to a Alinister 
whom he might have employed upon a new mission, the functions 
of which were to be exercised at the Court where he resided, is a 
question upon which I shall express no opinion. 

The act of 1810 limited the general language of that of 1800, 
and confined the discretion of the President, in the allowance 
of outfits, to the case of a Minister " on going from the United 
States to any foreign country." The first section of that act, 
after fixing the annual compensation of foreign Ministers. 
Charges, and Secretaries of Legation, contains the following 
enactment : " Provided, it shall be lawful for the President of the 
United States to allow to a Minister Plenipotentiary, or Charge 
des Affaires, on going from the United States to any foreign 
country, an outfit, which shall in no case exceed one year's full 
salary of such Minister or Charge des Affaires." This act, in 
express terms, limits the general expressions of former laws. 
It authorizes the President to allow an outfit to every public 
Minister, upon his first appointment, for the purpose of establish- 
ing him abroad. After he has received one outfit, and has gone 
from the United States to the Government to which he has been 
sent, in case he should be transferred from it to another Govern- 
ment, the President, since the act of 1810, has not had the power 
of allowing him a second outfit. 

I am glad that the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. 
Everett] cited the cases which he has done, of the allowance 
of outfits to Ministers, by the Executive, upon transferring them 
from one European Court to another. If the gentleman had 
not done so, we might have been at a loss to account for the 
change of phraseology in the act of 1810, and the difference 
betM^een it, and all former acts upon the same subject. The 
case of the outfit of Mr. Monroe, upon his transfer from England 
to France, and all the other cases brought into the view of the 
House by the gentleman, were determined, under fomier laws 
which clearly gave to the President power over the question. 
These cases are authorities against the gentleman : because they 
conclusively show the reason which guided the Legislature, in 
181 o, in changing the law, and in limiting the power of the 



296 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

President, in the allowance of outfits to the case of Ministers, on 
their departure from the United States to a foreign country. 

I may be asked, did Congress mean to declare, that no outfit 
should ever be allowed upon the transfer of a Minister from one 
Court to another? I answer, by no means. They intended to 
reserve to themselves the power of deciding, in each particular 
case, whether any new outfit ought to be allowed, and, if so, 
what should be its amount. If a Minister should be transferred 
from one extremity of Europe to another — from Lisbon to St. 
Petersburgh, a new outfit of $9000 might be necessary. But, 
in the case of a transfer from Lisbon to Madrid, there migfht 
be no occasion for any new outfit; and, if there were, the one- 
half of a full outfit, or even less, would probably be sufficient. 
The present Administration, in the estimates which they sub- 
mitted to this House, at the last session of Congress, asked a 
second outfit of $9000 for our Minister at Mexico, because they 
intended to transfer him from the City of Mexico to Tacubaya, 
a distance of only eight or nine miles. Although I did not think 
it proper to allow a full outfit, in such a case, yet I was glad that 
the request had been made; because it showed that the Executive 
were returning to a correct construction of the law, in relation 
to this subject. It showed that the President was unwilling to 
follow the precedents which existed heretofore, upon the trans- 
fer of a Minister from one court to another; or otherwise he 
would have allowed him an outfit, without consulting Congress. 

In my judgment, the act of 1810 is so plain, that he who 
runs may read. It is a universal rule of construction, that when 
a law delegates a special power to an individual, and confines 
its exercise to a particular case, that it necessarily excludes him 
from the exercise of general power, over all other cases. The 
act of Congress gave to the President the special power of allow- 
ing an outfit to a Minister, when he was leaving the United States 
and going to a foreign country; but yet, the act has received 
such a construction, that the Executive have claimed and exer- 
cised the power of allowing outfits, jn all cases, without limita- 
tion, and without restraint. For this purpose, the contingent 
fund is used, in violation of the law. 

It will not only be curious, but instructive, to mark the 
gradual progress of the Executive, until at length they repealed 
the act of i8to. In the month of April. 1813, the present Presi- 
dent, then being our resident Minister at Russia, was appointed 
one of the Envoys Extraordinary, under the joint commission. 



1828] SPEECH ON RETRENCHMENT 297 

to treat with England. As this commission owed its origin to 
the mediation of the Emperor of Russia, the seat of the negotia- 
tion was to be at St. Petersburgh. A short time after the 
appointment, Mr. Monroe, then Secretary of State, transmitted 
to Mr. Adams, $9000, a full outfit; although, at the time, it 
was not contemplated that Mr. Adams should change his resi- 
dence. The House will, therefore, observe that this was not 
even the case of a transfer from one court to another; but it 
was the allowance of a full second outfit to the same Minister, 
while he continued at the same court. The then President, when 
he directed the money to be sent, no doubt expected that Congress 
would sanction his conduct. Accordingly we find that an appro- 
priation was asked to cover this outfit. The question was then 
brought before the Congress of the United States, for their deter- 
mination, and was deliberately decided. A legislative construc- 
tion was given in August, 181 6, to the act of 18 10, against this 
outfit; but Congress, exercising a liberal discretion, allowed Mr. 
Adams $4,500 instead of $9,000. 

Sometime after this determination of the question, (too long, 
perhaps,) on the 23d June, 1814, Mr. Monroe wrote to Mr. 
Adams, in the following words : " It is necessary to apprize 
you, that, although a full outfit was transmitted to you by the 
Neptune, and intended to be allowed you by the Executive, as 
a member of the extra mission at St. Petersburgh, yet the Legis- 
lature, on a reference of the subject to them, for an appropria- 
tion, decided the principle by the amount appropriated, and the 
discussion which took place at the time, that half an outfit only 
could be allowed to a Minister, under circumstances applicable 
to your case. In your drafts on the bankers, and in your future 
accounts, you will be pleased to keep this deduction in view." 
After the present President had thus discovered, that the money 
was sent to him by mistake, did he submit to the decision of 
Congress? No, sir. Although, within the period of eight years, 
before his return to this country, he had received $115,000 from 
this "penurious Government;" yet he still continued to persist 
in retaining the whole outfit in his pocket. Congress gave a 
construction to their own law. They believed it had been vio- 
lated, when an outfit of $9,000 was sent by the President to Mr. 
Adams; yet they liberally allowed him $4-500. Instead of 
accepting that sum with gratitude, he made a complaint against 
this " penurious Government," and denied the right of the Legis- 
lature of the Union to interfere. He declared " that the principle 



/ 



298 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

which Congress would settle, by an ultimate refusal to allow the 
appropriation, could be no other than a principle to confiscate, 
without any alleged offence." 

The next year, however, conveyed him good tidings from 
this country. On the 19th November, 181 5, Mr. Monroe wrote 
a letter to Mr. Adams, marked " private," from which the follow- 
ing is an extract : " It was doubted whether the inhibition of a 
greater sum than one year's salary as an outfit, contained in the 
terms on going from the United States, might not be construed, 
as precluding an allowance by way of outfit, to any Minister who 
did not go from the United States. Mr. Erving's appointment 
to Spain involved the same question. It was wished to reserve 
the point for more deliberate consideration, than could be be- 
stowed on it, when the letter of March 15th was written to you. 
I have now the satisfaction to inform you, that the subject has 
been maturely weighed, and that the result has been in favor 
of the outfit, on the principle that those restrictive terms, if 
applicable to Ministers already in Europe, are no further so, than 
to confine the allowance to them, within the same limit." This 
letter communicated to him that construction of the Executive 
Department, which, since it was made, has entirely repealed in 
practice the limitation upon the allowance of outfits, contained 
in the act of 18 10, and secured to him his full outfit, in opposi- 
tion to the will of the Legislature, which had been clearly ex- 
pressed in 181 3. From 18 10 till November, 181 5, this act was 
obeyed both in its letter and in its spirit. Then, and not till then, 
did it sink under Executive construction. 

The accounts of Mr. Adams continued unsettled at the 
Treasury, a balance appearing against him, until after the passage 
of the general appropriation bill, in April, 1822. That act 
provided " that no money appropriated by the said act, shall be 
paid to any person for his compensation, who is in arrears to the 
United States, until such person shall have accounted for, and 
paid into the Treasury, all sums for which he may be liable." 
In consequence of the existence of this salutary provision, the 
Comptroller of the Treasun^ refused to pay Mr. Adams his salary 
as Secretary of State, until his account, as a Foreign Minister, 
should be liquidated. He appealed from this decision to Mr. 
Monroe, the then President, and, in support of this appeal, cited 
the private letter which Mr. Monroe, when Secretary of State, 
had written to him in November, 181 5, as conclusive of the ques- 
tion. Tn this appeal, he says. " that the President was authorized. 



1828] SPEECH ON RETRENCHMENT 299 

by the first section of the act of Congress, of ist May, 1810, to 
make this allowance, cannot be questioned, under the construction 
which has uniformly been given to it, a construction applied upon 
full deliberation and advisement, and which has been admitted in 
other cases upon the settlement of accounts at the Treasury. 
For this construction. I refer to the copy of your letter of the 
19th November, 181 5, herewith submitted." 

This subject was referred, by the President, to the Attorney 
General of the United States, and the construction which had 
been placed upon the act of Congress, by the Administration, in 
1815, was fully sustained, in the broadest terms, by that officer. 
In his opinion, dated June 5th, 1822, he declares, that " the ques- 
tion of outfit is given to the President exclusively, and without 
limit, save only he is not to exceed a whole year's salary." And 
thus, sir, you perceive in what manner a law, which, in express 
terms, limited the exercise of the discretion of the President, in 
the allowance of outfits, to Ministers " on going from the United 
States to a foreign country," has become unlimited ; and how the 
exclusive power over the question of outfit has been conferred 
upon the President. Notwithstanding this high authority, how- 
ever, I think I have maintained my proposition, and established, 
conclusively, that Mr. Adams now retains in his pocket $4,500, 
in violation of the act of 18 10 and in violation of the solemn 
legislative construction which it received, in 181 3. 

But, says the gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. Everett,] 
even if there were anything wrong in the settlement of the 
accounts of Mr. Adams, he is not to blame. He did not inter- 
fere — he left all these matters to the accounting officers of the 
Treasur}\ Is this the fact? Did he not receive the money, 
and does he not still retain it? Did he not refuse to refund it 
when it was demanded by the Comptroller? Did he not appeal 
from the decision of that officer, to the President of the United 
States ? And was not his refusal to comply with the decision of 
Congress, the cause why the act of 18 10 has received that con- 
struction, which has given to the President " exclusively, and 
without limit," the power over outfits? 

There is one matter of fact, which I wish to put right, be- 
fore I proceed further. Mr. Adams, in his account, on the 30th 
June, 18 14, charged the sum of $886.86, the expenses of a jour- 
ney from St. Petersburgh to Ghent. It is but just to him to say, 
that he had left his family behind him, at St. Petersburgh. He 
never did return from Ghent to St. Petersburgh ; but, yet, there 



300 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

was allowed to him the sum of $886.86, for his expenses in re- 
turning to that capital. This is what has been so often called his 
constructive journey. The construction, however, did not end 
here. After this allowance had been made, it was discovered that 
the travelling expenses of Mr. Bayard and Mr. Gallatin, from 
St. Petersburgh to London, and from thence to Ghent, amounted, 
for each, to the sum of $1,556.54. Their journey was accom- 
plished chiefly by land. In the final settlement of the account of 
Mr. Adams, instead of $886.86, which had been at first allowed 
to him for the expense of a journey which he never made, he 
was allowed the sum of $1,556.54. The reason for this change, 
which is spread upon the face of the account itself, is, that he 
was at first allowed but $886.86, " under an impression that the 
same sum, charged by him for the journey from St. Petersburgh 
to Ghent, would be equal to the expenses of his return, but which 
now appears, would not have been the case, as that journey was 
made chiefly by water, but his return must have been by land, and 
by the same route as that taken by Messrs. Gallatin and Bayard, 
and equally expensive." 

These are the facts. I shall not argue this point, but will 
leave it to my colleague and friend from Pennsylvania, [Mr. 
Ingham] and the gentleman from Rhode Island. I do not say 
that some allowance ought not to have been made to Mr. Adams, 
under the peculiar circumstances of the case. One thing, how- 
ever, is certain; that he did receive $1,556.54. for the expenses 
of a journey which he never made; because he never did return 
from Ghent to St. Petersburgh. 

[Here Mr. Randolph asked Mr. Buchanan to define what 
was a constructive journey.] 

Mr. B. said, I cannot comply with the request of the gentle- 
man from Virginia. If he cannot define it himself, no man in 
this House can. 

But, it has been urged by the gentleman from Massa- 
chusetts, [Mr. Everett] that precedents sanction the allowance 
of the outfit to Mr. Adams. I admit there have been precedents 
in abundance since 1815; but it is against this very doctrine of 
" safe precedents," that I am now contending. On the fourth 
of March next, it will be seven and twenty years since the inaugu- 
ration of Mr. Jefiferson. What has been our history ever since? 
Each President has nominated his successor, as regularly as 
though the Constitution conferred upon him that power. Durmg 
this period, each President has been called upon to sanction that 



1828] SPEECH ON RETRENCHMENT 301 

which he had clone as Secretary of State. The hne of " safe 
precedents " has been unbroken, and the first office in the world 
has passed as regularly to each succeeding Secretary of State, 
as the imperial crown ever descended from father to son. How 
is it possible that abuses can ever be corrected, under such cir- 
cumstances? A trifling departure from the law to-day, becomes 
a precedent for a greater violation to-morrow ; and whilst power 
continues to flow in one unbroken line, abuses must still continue 
increasing. There is no remedy for the People, but by breaking 
this line of safe precedents. It is this regular course of succession, 
which, in the lapse of time, destroys monarchies. The abuses 
which the father introduces, are sanctioned and extended by the 
son, until at length, after a few generations, the whole Govern- 
ment becomes tainted with corruption, and there is nothing left 
for the People, but the dreadful remedy of revolution. It is 
the principle against which I am now contending, without a 
special reference to any particular Administration. The People 
of the United States have at length determined to break this 
line of Cabinet succession, and to reverse the doctrine of safe 
precedents; and I trust and believe they will accomplish their 
purpose. Rotation in ofiice — that salutary principle, in a Re- 
publican Government, which purifies the political atmosphere, and 
causes the successor to view, with a jealous and scrutinizing 
eye, the acts of those who have gone before him — has had no real 
existence, in the Federal Government, since the days of Thomas 
Jefferson. There has been a regular succession ever since. Is an 
abuse now pointed out? We are at once told, it is sanctioned by 
a precedent ; the Monroes and the Gallatins have done the same 
thing, and why shall we not do so too? I answer, when the law 
forbids it, precedents ought to be disregarded. All the precedents 
Avhich have existed since 1815, although they have violated, can 
never repeal the act of 1810. 

I now come to that part of the argument of the gentleman 
from Massachusetts, [Mr. Everett] which relates to the billiard 
table. I should not have said one word upon this subject, did T 
not differ entirely, in relation to it, from the gentlemen from 
Virginia and South Carolina, [Mr. Randolph and Mr. Hamilton.] 
I admit that the expenditure of fifty dollars is a very little matter, 
and this has ever been the opinion of my friend from^ North 
Carolina, [Mr. Carson] who has been so often introduced mto the 
debate. If there be any gentleman in the House, who regards 
fifty dollars less than he does, I do not know the man. The ques- 



302 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

tion worthy of our consideration, is, not whether the price of the 
bilhard table was paid out of the PubHc Treasury, or out of the 
private purse of the President ; but whether a bilhard table ought 
to be set up, as an article of furniture, in the House of the Presi- 
dent of the United States? I am free to say, I think it ought 
not. In the State of Virginia, billiard tables are prohibited even 
in the mansions of private gentlemen, under very severe penalties. 
The gentleman from Virginia, therefore, cannot now indulge in 
this game at home: for I know him too well to believe that he 
would violate the laws of his own State. This shows the moral 
sense of the People of that ancient and respectable Common- 
wealth, in relation to the game of billiards. To use a familiar 
expression of their own, they do not go against either the exercise 
or the amusement of the play; but they know the temptation 
which it presents to gambling, and the consequent ruin which 
must follow in its train. It has a direct tendency to corrupt the 
morals of our youth. Indeed, I doubt whether there be a single 
State in the Union which has not prohibited the game of billiards. 
The People of the United States are generally a moral and relig- 
ious People; a proper regard, therefore, for pubhc opinion, for 
the scruples of the pious, ought to have prevented the first Magis- 
trate of the Union from setting such an example. [Here Mr. 
Randolph observed, there was no law in the District of Columbia, 
against playing billiards.] Mr. Buchanan then said, the Presi- 
dent of the United States is not only the President of the District 
of Columbia, but of the whole American People; and they con- 
demn this and every other species of gambling. Ought, then, the 
man who has been elevated to the most exalted station upon 
earth, and whose example must have a most powerful and exten- 
sive influence upon the morals of the youth of our country, to 
set up a billiard table, as an article of furniture, in the House 
which belongs to the American People? He certainly ought not 
to keep such an article of furniture in that house, nor ought he 
there to play at the game. I should never have invaded his 
domestic retirement, for the purpose of discovering whether he 
kept a billiard table or not. I should never have been the first 
to bring this matter, either before the House, or the country. 
It has been brought here by others, and I felt it to be my duty 
to express my opinion upon the subject. 

It has been said that Washington played at billiards. Be it 
so. I will, however, venture the assertion, that he never set up 



1828] SPEECH ON RETRENCHMENT 303 

a billiard table in the house which he occupied, at the Seat of 
Government, whilst he was President of the United States. 

Descending from the man who occupies the most exalted 
station in the country, nay, in the world, to the Judges of your 
Courts of Justice, I would ask, whether public opinion, in any 
portion of this Union, would tolerate, that such a magistrate 
might establish a billiard table in his house, or even play publicly 
at the game? 

Upon this subject, although I differ from the gentlemen from 
Virginia and South Carolina, yet I feel certain I do not differ 
from the People of the United States. They believe that the 
President ought never to have set such an example. Although 
I do not pretend to be a rigid moralist myself, yet these are my 
opinions. 

I will now make a few remarks upon another subject, and 
then I shall have done with the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Everett.] I do most sincerely, and from the bottom of 
my heart, regret, that the gentleman should have introduced 
the libel, which he says has been extensively circulated throughout 
the State of New Hampshire, into this debate. I never heard 
it before. I believe that the person to whom he has alluded is not 
only a lady by courtesy, but a lady by nature and education. I 
shall not credit one word derogatory to her reputation. I believe 
she would shrink from the idea of having her name introduced 
upon this floor, and thus sent over the United States in connex- 
ion with such a libel. I doubt, therefore, whether the gentleman 
has rendered her an acceptable service, in defending her before 
this House. I fear that he has exposed her to unjust and un- 
generous attacks; although every feeling of honor, and every 
dictate of policy, will be roused for her protection. The man 
who attempts to destroy the character of a woman, destroys his 
own. The American People are chivalrous and generous in 
their feelings. If I were asked to say, what single circumstance 
has done Mr. Adams the most injury in Pennsylvania. I should 
answer, without hesitation, the unmanly, the ungenerous, and 
the unjust attacks which have been made — not by him, for I be- 
lieve him to be wholly incapable of such conduct — but by the 
presses devoted to the Administration, against the pious, the 
benevolent, and the amiable lady of General Jackson. T hope 
none of the presses in the Opposition will follow this infamous 
example. 

The lady to whom the gentleman has alluded stands high in 



304 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

the public estimation, and in mine. I trust that her name may 
never be connected with the poHtics of the day; but that, freed 
from any public observation which might wound her feelings, 
she may be left to enjoy the consciousness of having done her 
duty in every station of life in which she has been placed. 

I shall now return to my colleague from Pennsylvania, and 
after noticing a few of his arguments, I shall no longer continue 
to exhaust the patience of the House. He has introduced into 
this debate, the late mission of Mr. King to England ; and has 
attempted to defend the Administration from any blame on 
account of its failure. I never have, and never shall, utter a 
single word against the memory of that distinguished man. I 
know his worth too well ; I am proud to say that I believe I was 
honored with his friendship. The failure of the mission is fairly 
to be attributed to the neglect of the Administration, and not 
either to the illness or neglect of the Minister. It is not because 
he was sick, but because he never received any instructions from 
his Government, that we have lost our trade with the Britisli West 
Indies. The negotiation between this country and England in 
relation to the West India trade, was nearly completed by Mr. 
Rush, in July, 1824. There was then but a single point of differ- 
ence between the two Governments. This Government claimed 
the right to have its productions admitted into the British West 
Indies upon the same terms with those of the British colony of 
Canada. The British Government replied, that they never could 
yield to such a demand ; and that, upon the same principle, they 
might claim to have the sugar of the West Indies admitted into 
the ports of the United States upon the same terms with that 
from Louisiana. When Mr. King left this country, if he had 
been instructed to yield this pretension, as Mr. Gallatin was after- 
wards instructed to do, the treaty would have been closed, and 
we should, at this time, have been in the enjoyment of the trade. 
Is it not clear, then, that the neglect of the Administration has 
occasioned the failure of the negotiation? Mr. King was sent 
from this country early in the Summer of 1825, and did not leave 
London until about the ist of July, 1826. During the whole 
of that period, he never received a line of instructions in relation 
to the principal object of his mission. Although this trade 
was by far the most important point in dispute between the two 
Governments, it was as entirely abandoned as though a question 
about it had never existed. All that the Administration had to 
say to Mr. King, was, go to England, abandon our former claim. 



1828] SPEECH ON RETRENCHMENT 305 

and close the treaty ; and we have every reason to beheve the 
treaty would have been closed. When Mr. Gallatin afterwards 
went to England, he received such instructions, but it was then 
too late. Although I should trust but little to the friendship 
of the British Government towards this country, yet I must be- 
lieve, from the testimony before me, that, if Mr. King had 
received the same instructions which Mr. Gallatin afterwards 
did, we should not have lost the trade. 

But it is said by the President of the United States, in his 
last message, that, in losing this trade, we have actually lost 
nothing. What have we lost? It is true that our productions 
still find their way to the British West Indies, through the neutral 
islands and through Canada; but the farmers of Virginia, Mary- 
land, and Pennsylvania, are compelled to pay the additional 
expense of the circuitous trade, both in the reduced price of the 
articles which we send to those markets and in the enhanced 
value of those which we receive in return. 

There is also now a most unequal distribution of these losses 
among different portions of the Union. The direct trade with 
Canada is not prohibited; and thus we are playing into the 
hands of the British Government. It has been their policy to 
hold out every encouragement to this trade, so that they may 
have the carriage of our productions to their West Indies. Our 
flour, therefore, flows freely and directly through the St. Law- 
rence to the British West Indies ; and thus, whilst the farmers 
in that portion of the Union enjoy all the benefits of a direct 
trade, those in every other portion are compelled to bear the 
burden of a trade that is circuitous. 

But I am not yet done with this mission to England. Mr. 
John A. King went out with his father to London, as Secretary 
of Legation. In this character he was entitled to receive, under 
the act of 1810, at the rate of $2,000 per annum for his services. 
The illness of Mr. King prevented him from remaining in London 
until the arrival of Mr. Gallatin, who had been appointed his 
successor. He was. therefore, under the necessity of leaving 
his son behind him in charge of the legation, where he remained 
during the months of T"ly and August, 1826, and then, upon 
the arrival of Mr. Gallatin, he followed his father to this country. 
Upon his return home, the President of the United States allowed 
him $4,500, the full outfit of a Charge des Affaires. 

Who is a Charge des Affaires under the laws of this country? 
In every particular, so far as regards his powers, he is placed 

20 



306 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

upon the same footing with our foreign Ministers. His rank 
is lower, and he receives but the one-half of the outfit, and 
one-half of the salary. Officers of this grade, from motives 
of economy, have usually been sent from this country to inferior 
courts. The act of 1810 expressly provides, that, to entitle any 
Charge des Affaires either to an outfit or salary, he must be 
appointed such by the President, v^ith the advice and consent of 
the Senate, if in session; if not, he may be appointed by the 
President alone, v^ho is, in that case, obliged to submit the 
appointment to the Senate, at its next session, for their advice 
and consent. This act also contains a negative provision on the 
subject, and declares that " no compensation shall be allowed to 
any Charge des Affaires who shall not be appointed as aforesaid." 
A mere Secretary of Legation, such as John A. King was, who, 
from accidental circumstances, had been left in charge of our 
affairs during an interval of a few weeks between the departure 
of one Minister, and the arrival of another, is certainly not such 
a Charge des Affaires as the act of Congress recognizes. 

Outfits were intended to enable our public Ministers and 
Charges to create establishments at foreign courts, where the 
law intended they should reside; but John A. King received 
his outfit upon his return home. Although he never was appoint- 
ed a Charge by the President, either with or without the consent 
of the Senate, yet he received a salaiy as such, for sixty days 
service, and an outfit, amounting together to the sum of $5,200. 
This outfit was given to him, not " on going from the United 
States," for the purpose of establishing himself in England, 
but upon his return from England to this country. Thus, at 
length, by the existence of " safe precedents," the Administration 
have been brought so far to violate the law, that they have 
allowed an outfit for returning home, instead of going abroad. 
[Here Mr. Randolph observed that this was an infit.] It is but 
just that I should admit that the Administration are not without 
precedents to sanction their construction of the law, although 
I do not believe that any one exists which goes the length of the 
case T have brought before the House. The existence of such 
precedents shows, in a more striking point of view, the necessity 
of returning to an economical and strict administration of the 
Government. 

T have one word to sav concerning the mission of Mr. Gal- 
latin. Tf. under the existing laws, our Ministers do not receive 
a sufficient compensation to support them abroad (and upon this 



1828] SPEECH ON RETRENCHMENT 307 

point I should be disposed to rely much upon the opinion of ni)- 
colleague) let their salaries be increased. I have heard, and I 
have given credit to the report, that Mr. Gallatin refused to go 
to England, unless upon the condition that he might return after 
one year's absence. If such a practice should prevail, our Minis- 
ters, in violation of the spirit of the existing law, will receive, 
by adding the outfit to the salary, $18,000, instead of $9,000, 
for one year's service. This is far from being the greatest evil 
which will flow from such a practice. You send a Minister 
abroad, but for one year; and as soon as he has established him- 
self in the confidence of the Government to which he is sent, he 
is permitted to return home. In this manner, the public service 
may be seriously injured. I am against the practice. 

I now advance to attack a position in the argument of my 
colleague, which I believe to be a perfect paradox. He asserted, 
and attempted to prove, that the patronage of the Government 
did not tend to strengthen but rather to weaken the Administra- 
tion by which it was distributed. If that gentleman's character 
for candor were not above suspicion, as I fimily believe it to be, 
I should doubt his sincerity. To establish this position, he said 
that gratitude was a weaker passion than self-love, which I 
admit; and that, therefore, the Administration lost more by dis- 
appointing candidates, than they gained by their appointment. 
But does not the gentleman know, that, when a man is once 
appointed to office, all the selfish passions of his nature are en- 
listed, for the purpose of retaining it? The office-holders are the 
enlisted soldiers of that Administration by which they are sus- 
tained. Their comfortable existence often depends upon the 
re-election of their patron. Nor does disappointment long rankle 
in the hearts of the disappointed. Hope is still left to them; 
and bearing disappointment with patience, they know will present 
a new claim to office, at a future time. 

In my humble judgment, the present Administration could 
not have proceeded a single year, with the least hope of re-election, 
but for their patronage. This patronage may have been used 
unwisely, as my friend from Kentucky, [Mr. Letcher] has insin- 
uated. I have never blamed them, I shall never blame them, for 
adhering to their friends. Be true to your friends, and they will 
be true to you, is the dictate both of justice and of sound policy. 
I shall never participate in abusing the Administration for re- 
membering their friends. If you go too much abroad with (his 



308 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

patronage, for the purpose of making new friends, you will offend 
your old ones, and make but very insincere converts. 

But has the gentleman from Pennsylvania adverted to the 
consequences of his doctrine ? There is no danger from patron- 
age! If so, there is no occasion for jealousy on the part of the 
States, towards this Government. All the principles which actu- 
ated our fathers, which made them watch the Federal Govern- 
ment with Argus eyes, for the purpose of restraining it within 
the limits of the Constitution, were utterly vain. For my own 
part, judging from history, when this Government was com- 
mencing its operation, and when its patronage was comparatively 
small, it required the immense weight of character which the 
father of his country possessed, to put the wheels of the machine 
into successful motion. I think there was then more danger 
of a dissolution, than a consolidation of the confederacy. I 
should then, when the words had some meaning, have been a 
Federalist, rather than an anti-Federalist. I have been called a 
Federalist, and I shall never be ashamed of the name. The 
times have since greatly changed. The power and the patronage 
of this Government have been extended, and are felt in every 
neighborhood of this vast empire. There is now infinitely more 
danger of consolidation than of disunion; and the States should 
now be jealous of every encroachment upon their rights. The 
argument of my colleague would put them to sleep. Upon his 
theory, the British Government must be very weak; because it 
possesses ten, nay, I might say twenty-fold the patronage of this 
Government. 

I shall now approach another branch of my colleague's argu- 
ment. I fully assent to his general proposition, that it is both 
our duty and our interest to cultivate friendly relations with every 
civilized nation; and for that purpose we should interchange 
with them ministers and diplomatic agents. Our ministers, when 
sent to a foreign court, should remain there, and not return 
home at the end of the year. The question upon which I would 
say, I should join issue with the gentleman, did this expression 
not " smell of the shop," is in what manner ought our ministers 
to appear abroad? Ours is the only pure Republican Govern- 
ment upon the earth. All our habits and our manners ought 
to be congenial to the simplicity and dignitv of our institutions. 
Among men of sense abroad, our ministers, attired in the style 
of country gentleman, would be more respectable, and more 
respected, than if they were bedizened in all the colors of the 



1828] SPEECH ON RETRENCHMENT 309 

rainbow. In every attempt to ape the splendor of the represen- 
tatives of monarchical Governments, we must fail. The veriest 
menial of the most contemptible court in Europe, who appears 
abroad in the character of a foreign minister, will be able to 
eclipse in dress and in finery, the representatives of the American 
People. 

What was the example of the ancient Romans ? In the days 
of their purity and their greatness, did they ever attempt to vie 
with the splendor of the Asiatic despots whom they subdued? 
Did they send ambassadors to the East, clothed in gorgeous 
apparel? No, they went in the simple dignity of Roman citizens, 
clothed with the majesty and power of the Roman People : and 
they carried respect for the Roman name, wherever they went. 
It was upon this model that Dr. Franklin acted, when he appeared 
as our minister at the Court of France, in the plain dress of a 
country gentleman. He would have deserved immortality for 
this act alone. He set an example from which his successors 
ought never to have departed. 

What is now the case? The last Administration have pre- 
scribed a uniform to be worn by our foreign Ministers. It con- 
sists of a military coat, covered, and glittering with gold lace, the 
cost of which is not less than 500 dollars, and a chapeau and small 
sword, corresponding with it, in splendor! And this dress is 
what my colleague has called the livery of the American People, 
which our ministers ought to be proud to wear ! I protest against 
this dress being called the livery of the American People. It is 
not so. It is the livery of the last, and the present Administration. 
No gentleman, who valued his standing with the People of this 
country, would ever appear before them in such a garb. The 
People of the United States do not even know that such a dress 
has been prescribed for their Ministers abroad. In many instances 
it must make us appear ridiculous in the eyes of foreign nations. 
Imagine to yourself a grave and venerable statesman, who never 
attended a militia training in his life, but who has been elevated 
to the station of a foreign Minister, in consequence of his civil 
attainments, appearing at court, arrayed in this military coat, 
with a chapeau under his arm, and a small sword dangling at his 
side ! Is not such a man compelled, by conforming to this regula- 
tion, to render himself ridiculous? " A military chieftain," who. 
in early life, had received his education at West Point, not 
the old "citizen soldier" who resides upon his fann. mi^ht 
sport a dress of this kind with some degree of grace ; but what 



310 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

a ridiculous spectacle would a grave lawyer, or judge, of sixty 
years of age, present, arrayed in such a costume? If the salary 
of our foreign Ministers be not sufficient to enable them to exer- 
cise that liberal, but plain hospitality, which belongs to the charac- 
ter of their country, I say again, let it be increased ; but let them 
never forget, in their dress, or in their manners, the simple 
grandeur which belongs to the character of Republicans. I trust, 
that, ere long, the days of Franklin will again return. 

The gentleman has informed us, that it is his opinion we 
ought to be represented at the Congress of Tacubaya, should it 
ever assemble. Whatever I may have thought of the Mission, 
I most heartily approved of the selection of the Minister. For 
one, I shall never sanction any improper allusions made upon 
this floor to that gentleman, in relation to this Mission. There 
is no man in the ranks of the Administration, whom I should 
rather see promoted, nor is there any man among them more de- 
serving of promotion. If he should ever again go to Tacubaya, 
I should regret to see him in any dress, but in that of an Ameri- 
can gentleman. In that costume, he will infinitely better repre- 
sent his own character, and that of the American People, than if 
he were decked out in all the splendid uniform prescribed by the 
Administration. He will then set an example of plainness and 
simplicity, which may be useful to the Republics of the South. 

The gentleman has awarded the laurel crown, to deck the 
brow of the Military Chieftain ; but has decreed the civic wreath 
tc the statesman ripened by the experience of 40 years. He 
has informed us, he was no prophet ; and I believe the fates will 
never confirm his decree. I trust and believe, that the People 
of the United States will elevate the "citizen soldier" to the 
supreme magistracy of the Union. In that event, and after he 
shall have been tried by them, I venture to predict, that their 
award will entwine the civic wreath with the laurel crown; and 
that Jackson will live in the history of his country, as the man, 
of the present age, who was " first in war, first in peace, and 
first in the hearts of his countrymen." I believe that the annals 
of the human race will furnish but few examples of men, who 
were endowed by nature with rare and distinguished military 
talents, without, at the same time, possessing the capacity for 
civil command. It would be easy to quote a splendid catalogue of 
names, in proof of this assertion ; but I shall only mention those 
of Pericles, Cincinnatus, Charlemagne, Alfred, Henry the 4th of 
France, Napoleon — and, above all, our own unequalled Wash- 
ington. 



1828] SPEECH ON RETRENCHMENT 311 

I shall now descend from the lofty heights to which we have 
been soaring, and make a few remarks upon the resolutions which 
have not been before the House, for several days past. I shoukl 
have been opposed to their introduction, had I been consulted 
upon the subject. I should be willing, in this particular, to take 
the sagacity of the gentleman from Virginia as my guide. I 
agree with him, that it is not our business to originate any prop- 
osition, except such as have the necessary legislation of the 
country directly in view. The party in this House, opposed to 
the re-election of the present President, do not require any 
caucussing to direct their conduct. The path of policy, as well as 
duty, lies open before them. They ought to do the Legislative 
business of the country, and then go home, leaving the great 
question of the Presidential election to be decided by the Ameri- 
can People. They will think more of us, if we should let it alone. 
For these reasons, I shall not vote, during the present session, in 
favor of considering either the amendments to the Constitution, 
or the constitutionality of the old Sedition Law, or any other sub- 
ject which must necessarily divert our attention from the business 
of the nation, to the politics of the day. Had any question been 
taken, I should not, at this time, have even voted in favor of 
considering the resolution to inquire into the expediency of plac- 
ing a picture of the battle of New Orleans in the Rotundo of the 
Capitol. As to the resolutions, to what do they amount? Do 
gentlemen suppose that the character of the Administration is 
to be tried by a Committee of Accounts? I believe that there 
are some supernumerary officers in the Departments; but I do 
not think that the salaries, of such as ought to be retained, are too 
high. In less than three years, the late war gave rise to an expen- 
diture of $120,000,000, beyond the usual amount. After its 
close, there were an immense number of accounts to be settled, 
which produced a new organization of the Departments, to meet 
the necessity of the case. These accounts have nearly all been 
liquidated ; but still all the new offices and clerkships, which were 
then created, continue to exist, and others have been added. This 
is not so much the fault of the Administration, as of Congress. 
A reduction in the number of these officers and clerks, and a more 
strict and economical application of the different contingent funds, 
to the purposes for which they were intended, embrace everythmg 
which I expect the committee will be able to accomplish. They 
possibly mav make some discoveries in relation to the past ex- 
penditures of the different contingent funds, which have not yet 
been brought before the House. 



312 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

In conclusion, I must express my most sincere thanks to 
the House, for their poHte attention ; an attention which I do not, 
at any time, deserve; much less at this time, after they have 
been exhausted by so long and so fatiguing a debate. 



REMARKS, FEBRUARY 11, 1828, 

ON THE PRINTING OF DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE 
COURT MARTIAL AT MOBILE.i 

Mr. Buchanan said, I rise to express a sincere hope that the 
House may promptly decide this question. I fear, from the 
course which the debate has taken, that we may again find our- 
selves involved in a political contest. I call upon those gentlemen 
upon this floor, if there be any such, with whom my opinion has 
any influence, to avoid making this a party question. The House 
have already wasted sufficient time upon questions of that char- 
acter. We have already withdrawn ourselves long enough from 
the public business of the nation, for the purpose of attending 
to the politics of the day. 

What is the true, the intrinsic nature of the question now 
before the House? It is simply this: Shall the documents be 
printed with, or without, the report of the committee? What 
possible difficulty can arise in answering this question? No 
gentleman has objected to printing the report. Whether the 
documents shall be attached to the report or not, both will be 
read by the People of the United States. Then, why detach 
them from each other? Let them go together. The question, 
however, is one of so trifling a character, that I should vote in the 
negative, rather than be instrumental in producing another pro- 
tracted party debate. 

The Committee on Military Affairs have been, in my opinion, 
unjustly censured, because they took possession of the documents 
before they were printed. But was not the order of the House 
to refer, equally powerful with the order to print? The com- 
mittee had at least as much right to the possession of these docu- 
ments as the printer. One gentleman may have wished that the 
printing might be the first step, while another desired that the 
reference might have the precedence. How, then, are the com- 
mittee censurable? If the printing had been delayed too long, 



' Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part 2, p. 1497. 
See supra, p. 275. 



1828] INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS 313 

the House could and would have exercised a control over their 
committee. 

If the House had wished the documents to be printed, with- 
out the commentary of the committee, they ought to have passed 
an order for printing simply. But at the same time that we 
ordered the printing, we sent the documents to the committee. 
For what purpose ? Certainly that we might obtain their report : 
and now the only question is, whether the documents, and the 
report upon them, shall be printed together or separately? I 
shall vote that the commentary shall accompany the text ; but yet 
I think it a matter of very little importance. 

The only change which the committee have made in the 
order of the letters, is to place them in the order of their dates, 
and make the answer follow the letter to which it is a reply. 
No gentleman can wish to see the answer placed before the letter 
which gave birth to it. Mr. B. again expressed a hope that this 
might not become a party question, and produce a party debate. 



REMARKS, FEBRUARY 14, 1828, 

ON INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS.^ 

Mr. Buchanan expressed his dissent from the opinions 
avowed by the two gentlemen who had preceded him. The true 
question ought to be distinctly stated. The act of 1824 sanc- 
tioned the policy, not of immediately entering upon a plan of 
internal improvement, but of preparing for it, by obtaining sur- 
veys, plans, and estimates, in relation to the various roads and 
canals, that were required throughout the country. The sum 
of $30,000 had been appropriated, not for a single year, but 
for a specific purpose, which purpose had not yet been accom- 
plished. Many surveys were now in progress, which were not 
more than half completed, and the question was, whether the 
House would withdraw the means of completing them. A dis- 
cussion of the general policy of the plan, was out of place on an 
appropriation bill. Whatever might be decided as to carrying 
such a system of internal improvement into effect, these surveys 
were of great advantage to the American People. Should that 
system never be adopted, this mass of information could not 
fail to be useful. The constitutional question of power did not 



' Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part 2, pp. 1513- 
1514- 



314 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

fairly arise, on a proposal to employ the Engineers already at the 
disposal of the War Department, in a particular manner. Should 
the time ever arrive when we have more in the Treasury than we 
know what to do with, the argument of the gentleman from 
Virginia [Mr. Barbour] might have some force. But the ques- 
tion now was, whether the House would arrest these surveys? 
Mr. B. for one, would not do it. He would give the Adminis- 
tration the sum now asked, and would hold them responsible for 
its application. 

REMARKS, MARCH 1, 1828, 

ON THE USE OF THE HALL OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.' 

Mr. Buchanan said, he was pleased that the gentleman 
from New Hampshire [Mr. Bartlett] had moved the amendment 
now before the House; but he felt sorry there was not a better 
prospect that it would prevail. Sir, said Mr. B., I trust there is 
no gentleman upon this floor who would give any vote tending, 
in the slightest degree, to evince a want of respect for religion, 
with more reluctance than I should myself. It is for this reason 
that I shall trouble the House with a few remarks, explanatory 
of the vote which I intend to give in favor of this amendment. 

When the practice of using the Hall of the House of Rep- 
resentatives as a place for public worship commenced, it was 
perfectly proper. And why? Because it was then necessary. 
At that time there were but few churches in this city, and they 
were not sufficient to accommodate all the persons who desired 
to attend public worship. At present, the case is altogether dif- 
ferent. Many churches have since been erected, and there is 
now no longer any necessity that this House should be used upon 
the Sabbath, for the purpose of religious Avorship. There is an 
abundance of room in the different churches for the accommo- 
dation of all those who think proper to attend. Both the pastors 
and the people of these churches are proverbially polite to strang- 
ers. No member of Congress ever enters a church in this city, 
who is not immediately offered a comfortable seat. I believe 
I have been in nearly all of them, and can therefore testify, 

*A resolution being before the House to prohibit the use of the hall, 
unless otherwise specifically ordered, " for any other purpose than the public 
business of Congress, and religious service on Sunday," Mr. Bartlett moved 
to amend the resolution by striking out the last clause. (Register of Debates, 
20 Cong. I Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part 2, pp. 1 702-1703.) 



1828] USE OF REPRESENTATIVES' HALL 315 

that no necessity now exists for converting this Hall into a place 
of public worship, for the accommodation of members of Con- 
gress. I have conversed with some of the clergy, and with other 
individuals of this city, upon the subject, and they all expressed 
but one opinion, and that was in accordance with the amendment 
proposed by the gentleman from New Hampshire. 

From my own observation, I cannot say that 1 think this 
Hall is a very suitable place for public worship. Can there be 
any doubt but that a large portion of those who attend here, come 
from motives of mere idle curiosity? A love of novelty — a de- 
sire to see the Hall — attracts such crowds, that the members who 
attend can rarely be accommodated. I have often been unable 
to obtain a seat upon the floor, and when I did. I have generally 
yielded it up, from motives of politeness, before the end of the 
service. It has often been my fate, either to stand upon the prom- 
enade behind the seat which you now occupy, or to sit upon the 
steps outside of the bar of the House. There is nothing in the ■ 
whole scene like what we have been accustomed to behold in a 
house of worship. When we enter a Church, which has been 
dedicated to the worship of the Deity, our attention is at once 
arrested and fixed by the order and solemnity of everything 
which surrounds us. Religious feeling is the natural offspring 
of such a place. But what is the case in this Hall ? I have often 
been here, when people were continually entering, during the 
whole service, and thus producing continual confusion. 

There is no necessity that this House should be used as a 
place of worship; and I feel confident that the great cause of 
religion is not advanced, but injured, by such a practice. We 
have two excellent Chaplains — pious and eloquent men— who 
pray for us alternately every morning. I should never think of 
dispensing with their prayers. These Chaplains both have re- 
spectable congregations in this City. We now deprive them of 
the religious services of their Pastors on the Sabbath, although 
we might attend the Churches in which they officiate, with much 
more comfort and convenience to ourselves, than we experience 
in this Hall. There is room enough for us all in the different 
Churches, and we should all be welcome. In voting for this 
amendment, therefore. I utterly disclaim the imputation which 
the gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. Chilton] would attach to its 
friends, that they are opposed to religious worship. 

This House has now become so dirty, that I have recently 
seen clouds of dust rising from the carpet to the ceiling, m 



316 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

such a manner, as to obscure the view. It is perfectly notorious, 
that more dirt is brought into this Hall by the crowds who attend 
here upon Sunday, than during the whole remainder of the week. 
As the cause of religion does not require that we should submit 
to this inconvenience, for one, I am willing to close these doors 
upon the Sabbath. I am glad the amendment has been offered, 
although I think it is very doubtful whether it will prevail. I 
do not pretend to be a prophet ; but yet, I shall venture to pre- 
dict, that it will not be twelve months before we shall feel our- 
selves compelled to adopt it. 



REMARKS, MARCH 24, 1828, 

ON MEADE'S CLAIM. i 

Mr. Buchanan said, I voted against the motion of the gentle- 
man from Virginia, [Mr. Randolph] to lay this bill upon the table ; 
because I believed, that in a few minutes its fate would have been 
finally decided, by a direct vote of the House, upon its engross- 
ment. 

I shall not suffer myself to be drawn into the debate, upon 
the general questions involved in this bill, neither shall I express 
any opinion in regard to the validity of Mr. Meade's claim. The 
suggestion made by the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Archer] 
has no application to me ; because I have read and carefully exam- 
ined all the documents, connected with this claim, which have 
been published; and still I am not informed as to its nature. I 
ought not therefore to have formed any opinion upon the subject. 

It has been admitted by the chairman of the committee who 
reported this bill, []\Ir. Everett] that the royal certificate ought 
to have no effect upon our decision ; and that it must be sustained 
by other documents, before this claim can be allowed. It is cer- 
tain, that upon this certificate alone, the United States ought not 
to be made answerable to Mr. IMeade. Why then are not the 
documents, necessary to sustain this claim, now produced ? Where 
are they ? In the possession of Mr. IMeade ? I believe not. We 
are then about to provide a tribunal for the examination of docu- 
ments which may be in Spain, or may be. the Lord knows where. 
We are asked to call into existence a Board of Commissioners, but 



* Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part 2, pp. 1967- 
T968. Sec, as to Meade's claim, Moore, History and Digest of International 
Arbitrations, V. 4502-4506. 



1828] THE MEADE CLAIM 317 

whether they shall ever act or not, will depend upon the contin- 
gency, whether Mr. Meade will ever be able to procure his vouch- 
ers. Let these vouchers be first procured ; let Mr. Meade present 
them to the House, and let them be submitted to one of our com- 
mittees ; and if they should be too voluminous for its examination, 
then and not till then shall I vote to establish a Board. It is the 
first time I have ever heard of a claim sent by Congress to be 
audited, whilst the vouchers upon which it rested were not in the 
possession, and for any thing we know, might never be in the 
power of the claimant. Against this claimant I entertain no 
prejudice; on the contrary, my feelings are all of an opposite 
character ; but I am not willing to establish a special commission 
to investigate his claim, before he has submitted to us any 
vouchers upon which it can be sustained. 

[Mr. Everett here explained. He said he was informed that 
Mr. Meade had a large mass of documents in his possession ready 
to submit.] 

Mr. B. proceeded. Sir, said he, this makes the case stronger 
against him, than I had ever supposed. If he had the documents 
upon which his claim is founded, or any part of them in his posses- 
sion, why did he not submit them to the committee? And why- 
did that committee rest their report upon the royal certificate 
alone, which is now admitted to be insufficient to establish the 
claim ? 

It has been said, that the passage of this bill, in its present 
form, will not commit the House upon this claim. I am far from 
being of that opinion. The bill proposes to appoint three commis- 
sioners, to examine and liquidate this claim, and report such items 
of it as they think ought to be allowed, together with the evidence. 
And am I to be told, that if we shall establish a tribunal to ex- 
amine and to decide this question, that after they shall have 
reported their decision to this House, we shall be as free to act, as 
if there had been no such proceedings under our authority? Will 
this be the case, after we shall have asked and obtained the opin- 
ions of the Attorney General and two of the Auditors of the 
Treasury? It is true we may reverse their decision if we think 
proper; but it is equally certain, that the judgment of a judicial 
tribunal established by our own authority, must necessarily have 
an influence upon our decision. It will be prima facie evidence of 
the justice of the claim, and will relieve the claimant from the 
burthen of proof, and cast it upon the United States. 

But, sir. I do not like to send a claim of tliis magnitude to 



318 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

be decided by persons whom I do not know. The President may, 
in his discretion, appoint any two of the five Auditors of the 
Treasury. These Auditors are all equal in the eye of the law ; 
but yet, there are some of them upon whose decision I should rely 
with much more confidence than upon that of others. I do not 
suppose that the Attorney General would leave the duties of his 
station to audit this claim. The business will, therefore, be chiefly 
transacted by the two Auditors who may be appointed. 

I cannot perceive what the friends of the claim expect from 
the establishment of this tribunal, unless they suppose that its 
decision will have an influence upon our judgment. In what 
manner can it expedite the final determination of the claim? The 
bill does not propose that it shall be paid, until after Congress, 
at their next session, shall have acted upon the report of the 
Board. Why then should we not wait until the next session, 
when the vouchers, if they exist, can be produced to us ; and, if 
then, the Committee on Foreign Relations shall not be able to 
examine and decide upon them, we can refer them to a Board of 
Commissioners. It is not even pretended that the vouchers are 
all here yet. We have seen none of them, and in the course of 
this long debate, I have never heard until this day, that any of 
them were in the possession of Mr. Meade. 



REMARKS, MARCH 27, 1828, 

ON THE DUTIES ON WOOLLENS.^ 

]\Ir. Mallary thereupon ofifered the following: 

Strike out of the 2d section from the ist to the 6th paragraph inchisive, 
and insert : 

ist. On all unmanufactured wool 40 per cent, ad valorem, until the 30th 
June. 1829, afterwards five per cent, per annum in addition, until the duty 
shall amount to fifty per cent. 

2d. On all manufactures of wool, or of which wool shall be a component 
material, except blankets, worsted stuff goods, bombazines, hosiery, caps, 
gloves, mits, and bindings, the actual value of which, at the place whence im- 
ported, shall not exceed fifty cents the square yard, shall be taken and deemed 
to have cost fifty cents the square yard, and charged with a duty to be paid 
and collected, of 40 per cent, on such cost, until the 30th day of June, 1829 
— after which time, five per cent, per annum in addition, until the duty shall 
amount to fifty per cent. 



' Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part 2, pp. 
2038-2039. 



1828] DUTIES ON WOOLLENS 319 

3d. All manufactures of wool, or of which wool shall be a component 
material, (excepting as aforesaid) the actual value of which, at the place 
whence imported, shall exceed fifty cents the square yard, and shall not exceed 
two dollars and fifty cents the square yard, shall be deemed to have cost two 
dollars and fifty cents the square yard, and charged with the amount of duty 
on such cost, and in the manner as is in this section before provided. 

4th. All manufactures of wool, or of which wool shall be a component 
material, (except as aforesaid) the actual value of which, at the place whence 
imported, shall exceed two dollars and fifty cents, and not exceed four 
dollars the square yard, shall be deemed to have cost four dollars the square 
yard, and be charged with the amount of duty on such cost, and in the 
manner as is in this section before provided. 

Sth. All manufactures of wool, or of which wool shall be a component 
material, (except as aforesaid,) the actual value of which, at the place 
whence imported, shall exceed four dollars the square yard, and shall not 
exceed six dollars the square yard, shall be taken and deemed to have cost 
six dollars the square yard, and be charged with the amount of duty, and 
in the manner as is in this section before provided. 

6th. All manufactures of wool, or of which wool is a component 
material, (except as aforesaid,) the actual value of which, at the place 
whence imported, shall exceed six dollars the square yard, shall be charged 
with the amount of duty, and in the manner as in this section before provided. 

Mr. M. supported this amendment in a short explanatory 
speech ; whereupon, 

Mr. Condict, expressing a wish that the amendment just 
offered might be printed, moved for the rising of the committee ; 
but withdrew the motion at the request of 

Mr. Buchanan, who moved to amend the amendment pro- 
posed by Mr. Mallary, by striking out the third, fourth, fifth, 
and sixth paragraphs thereof, and also the following words from 
the second paragraph, viz: "the actual value of which, at the 
place whence imported, shall not exceed fifty cents the square 
yard, shall be taken and deemed to have cost fifty cents the square 
yard, and charged with " — and also the words, " on such cost.''— - 
[The purpose of Mr. B.'s amendment was to strike out the mini- 
mums from the amendments proposed by Mr. Mallary.] 

He then signified a wish that the motion of Mr. Condict 
might prevail. 



320 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

REMARKS, MARCH 28, 1828, 

ON THE DUTIES ON WOOLLENS.' 

The amendment offered to the bill by Mr. Mallary, Chairman 
of the Committee on Manufactures, yesterday, was read. 

The amendment to the above, offered by Mr. Buchanan, of 
Pennsylvania, was then also read. 

Mr. Buchanan said, I presume there will be no difficulty in 
understanding the effect of the amendment which I have offered. 
It proposes merely to strike out the minimums from the amend- 
ment offered by the gentleman from Vermont, [Mr. Mallary.] 
Should my motion prevail, then the amendment of that gentle- 
man will contain a progressive increase of the present ad valorem 
duty of 2,3/^3 per cent, upon the importation of woollen goods, 
until it shall reach 50 per cent. During the first year, it will be 
40 per cent., the second 45 per cent., and the third year it will 
attain the limit of 50 per cent. The increase of ad valorem duty 
will then amount to 16 2-3 per cent. The addition to the present 
duty upon coarse woollen cloths, costing in a foreign country 
not exceeding 33^ cents per square yard, will be much greater 
than what I have stated. It may be proper, should my amend- 
ment prevail, to make a discrimination in their favor, similar to 
that which exists under the present law. Should my motion pre- 
vail, the amendment offered by the gentleman from Vermont will 
still be open for other amendments. I have made this explana- 
tion, so that my purpose may be clearly understood. 

I shall now, as briefly as possible, state the reasons which 
have induced me to move to strike out the minimums from the 
amendment of the gentleman from Vermont, [Mr. Mallary.] I 
shall not, at this time, discuss either the constitutionality or the 
policy of protecting domestic industry by legislation. I consider 
that these questions have long since been settled. This policy has 
been established, not under any particular excitement, not in high 
party times, but by all parties, and at all times. I admit that in 
our legislation we ought not to be bound by precedents; but yet 
it is equally clear that a uniform current of precedents, during a 
long period of years, furnish the highest evidence of the correct- 
ness of those principles upon which they are founded. 

The system of minimums proposed by the gentleman from 



' Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part 2, pp. 2039- 
2045. 



1828] DUTIES ON WOOLLENS 321 

Vermont is an entire departure from the settled policy of the 
country. This policy has ever been to afford that degree of pro- 
tection to domestic manufactures which would enable them to 
sustain a fair and successful competition with the manufactures 
imported from abroad. Our legislation has ever been at war 
with direct and immediate prohibition. In times past, it has been 
our policy gradually, not suddenly, to banish foreign manufactures 
from our markets. In this manner, the commerce anployed by 
any particular branch of foreign manufactures is gradually di- 
verted into new channels. No interest in the country sustains a 
shock. Even the price of articles, under such a protection, is but 
little enhanced in the beginning, and at the end of a few years it 
sinks below the old standard. We have acted upon these prin- 
ciples since the origin of the Federal Government. Since 1789, 
when the duty upon woollen goods was fixed at 5 per cent, ad 
valorem, the increase has been gradual until it has now reached 
33 >^ per cent. 

Let me ask this committee what would be the effect of the 
minimums recommended by the Harrisburg Convention, and pro- 
posed by the gentleman from Vermont? [Mr. Mallary.] No 
man can doubt but that it would be the absolute, immediate prohi- 
bition of a very large proportion of the woollen goods which we 
now import. Much as gentlemen may have differed concerning 
what would be the practical effect of minimums generally, no one 
has denied that these minimums would immediately, to a great 
extent, prohibit the importation of foreign woollens. Under the 
system proposed by the Harrisburg Convention, a square yard of 
cloth costing fifty cents, or below that price, would pay a duty of 
28 cents. If, however, it should cost fifty-ow^ cents, it would pay 
a duty of $1 40. Thus one cent of increase in the price would 
make a difference of $1 12, or more than 150 per cent, in the 
duty. In order to reach the second minimum, we must suddenly 
rise, from cloth costing 50 cents the square yard, to that which 
costs $2 50. Each square yard of cloth, then, which has cost any 
price above fifty cents, and not exceeding $2 50, without regard 
to its quality, must pay the same duty of $1 40. H, however, it 
should cost $251, then it will fall within the operation of the third 
minimum, of $4, and pay a duty of $2 25. Thus at this point 
it will be perceived that a difference of one cent m the price will 
make a difference of 85 cents in the duty. There is a fourth 
minimum, which embraces all cloths costing above $4, and not 
exceeding $6, the square yard, which will operate in a similar 
21 



322 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

manner. Cloth costing more than $6 the square yard will pay- 
only an ad valorem duty. Thus it will be perceived that the 
system of minimums is not only complicated and arbitrary in its 
nature, but it is calculated to deceive the people of the United 
States. And why ? The amendment of the gentleman from Ver- 
mont proposes to increase the ad valorem duty 162-3 per cent.; 
and to this point the public attention will be directed. But what 
will be the effect of the minimums which are covered under the 
veil of obscurity? I shall not make my calculations at the ex- 
treme points, because that might not be considered fair; but I 
shall take the intermediate prices between the minimums. They 
will be cloths costing $1 50, $3 25, and $5 per square yard. Upon 
the first class the duty would be increased by the proposed amend- 
ment, from 33^, the present rate, to 84 per cent, ad valorem. I 
need not pursue this calculation further. Every gentleman can 
do it for himself; and he will discover that it will lead to similar 
results. 

In my opinion no combination of wool growers and woollen 
manufacturers, should ever attempt to dictate a tariff to the people 
of the United States. They would be more than men, if self- 
interest did not prejudice their judgment, and call forth proposi- 
tions for their own benefit, at the expense of the community. The 
argument, therefore, that we should sustain this proposition, be- 
cause it emanated from the Harrisburg Convention, is not entitled 
to much consideration ; and more especially, as they have recom- 
mended a departure from the long settled and long approved 
policy of the country. 

The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Bates,] has as- 
serted, if I understood him correctly, that the Legislature of Penn- 
sylvania have sanctioned and recommended the proposition of the 
Harrisburg Convention respecting woollens. In this he is entirely 
mistaken. The Legislature of that State, with the practical wis- 
dom which marks its character, have drawn the line between pro- 
tection and prohibition ; and whilst they have recommended the 
one, they have denounced the other. They have also recom- 
mended such a tariff as will operate equally, both upon the rich 
and upon the poor. This can never be the case under a system 
the principle of which is the higher the price between any two 
minimums, the lower the rate of duty. I shall read a few lines 
from the preamble to their resolutions. It declares, that " the 
best interests of our country demand, that every possible exertion 
should be made to procure the passage of an act of Congress 



1828] DUTIES ON WOOLLENS 323 

imposing such duties as will enable our manufacturers to enter 
into fair competition with foreign manufacturers." And again : 
" the people of Pennsylvania do not ask for such a Tariff as 
zvould secure to any one class, or to any section of the country, a 
monopoly. They want a system of protection, which will extend 
its blessings as well as its burdens, as equally as possible, over 
every part of the Union — to be uniform in its operation upon the 
rich as well as the poor." 

The amendment of the gentleman from Vermont, should it 
prevail, will be an absolute and immediate prohibition of nearly 
all the foreign woollens which are worn by the middle and poorer 
classes of the people. The cloth which they chiefly use, costs 
from 50 cents to $1 75 per square yard in England. All this class 
of foreign woollens will be immediately excluded. As soon as 
the law shall begin to operate, they will be subjected to a duty of 
$1 12 per square yard. This prohibition will annually become 
more extensive, because the second year the duty will be increased 
to $1 26, and the third year to $1 40 the square yard. When it 
shall attain its maximum, no cloth can be imported which will cost 
abroad between 50 cents and $2 25 the square yard. I will not 
turn to the testimony for the purpose of proving; because it is 
within the recollection of all, that these are the cloths which are 
worn by the mass of our fellow citizens; they are the cloths ex- 
clusively worn by the poor. Are the committee prepared, at once, 
to prohibit all this class of woollens? Although I am willing 
to go to a reasonable extent in protection, yet I never shall con- 
sent, at one deadly blow, to impose such an immense tax upon my 
constituents, for the benefit of the woollen manufacturers, as this 
amendment contemplates. It is true, our country is capable of 
producing wool in abundance, and we may soon erect factories in 
a sufficient number to supply the domestic demand, and thus 
reduce the price; but, in the mean time, the people would be 
compelled to pay extravagant prices for articles of the first neces- 
sity. 

Before I come to speak more particularly of the minimums, 
I wish to correct a mistake into which gentlemen upon all sides of 
the House appear to have fallen. They seem to think that the 
amendment of the gentleman from Vermont, now before the 
committee, is the same with the Woollen Bill of the last session. 
This is not the case. That bill was a much less extravagant and 
less exceptionable measure than the proposition of the Harrisburg 
Convention. Had the Woollen Bill become a law, it would have 



324 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

operated exclusively by means of its minimums. It did not pro- 
pose any increase of ad valorem duty. The amendment now 
before the committee, whilst it proposes minimums much more 
extravagant in their operation than those contained in that bill, 
increases the rate of duty from 33^ to 50 per cent, ad valorem. 
The Woollens Bill of last winter contained an intermediate mini- 
mum of $1 50 between its first minimum of 40 cents and its third 
of $2 50; whilst the proposition now before us leaps at once from 
50 cents to $2 50. Under the bill of last winter, the average ad 
valorem duty at the intermediate points between the minimums, 
on cloth costing abroad between 50 cents and 2 dollars and 50 
cents, would not have amounted to 50 per cent.; whilst under 
this proposition it will exceed 80 per cent. Although that bill 
was justly considered extravagant, it bears no comparison with 
the proposed amendment. 

I admit that the testimony before us is conclusive; that the 
woollen manufacturers require additional protection, and I am in 
favor of giving it to them, in the ancient ad valorem manner. 

I have another remark to make on the amendment now 
before us. The gentleman from Vermont has dissolved the 
friendly union which the Harrisburg Convention had established 
between the wool grower and the woollen manufacturer. Whilst 
he has now proposed to give the wool grower an additional pro- 
tection of only 20 per cent, ad valorem upon the importation of 
foreign wool, he has been urging the Committee to sustain the 
recommendation of that Convention in regard to woollens. He is 
willing to adopt their opinion in its utmost extent, in favor of the 
manufacturer, whilst he has abandoned it in regard to the wool 
grower. Some of the wool growers have shown so much good 
nature throughout this transaction, that I should not be astonished 
to hear from them that an additional ad valorem duty of 20 per 
cent, will afford them more protection than the duty proposed 
by that Convention. I do not wish to be misunderstood. I think 
the additional protection now proposed by the gentleman from 
Vermont, sufficient for the wool grower; although it bears no 
proportion to his proposition in favor of the manufacturer. It 
is the purpose of my amendment to reduce the protection which 
he wishes to extend to the manufacturer, so as to make it bear a 
just proportion to that which he has proposed in favor of the wool 
grower. 

I congratulate the committee that the gentleman from New 
York [Mr. Storrs] has admitted that there ought not to be a dis- 



1828] DUTIES ON WOOLLENS 325 

criminating duty in favor of coarse wool costing 8 cents per 
pound and under. I take it this point is now abandoned. He 
said, and said truly, that the capacity of this country for the 
production of wool is unbounded, and that we are under no neces- 
sity to import coarse wool from foreign countries. The amend- 
ment of the gentleman from Vermont expressly yields this point, 
about which we have heard so much discussion; because it pro- 
poses the same rate of duty upon all wool, whether it be coarse 
or fine, in proportion to its value. This concession brings us 
nearer together, and makes it more probable, that a bill may pass. 
I shall now undertake to prove, that the minimums, which 
the amendment proposes, will be premiums for the perpetration of 
fraud and of perjury. Let us take a single example for the pur- 
pose of illustration. The importer of a square yard of cloth 
costing fifty cents, will pay a duty upon it of 28 cents ; but should 
it cost fifty-one cents instead of fifty, the duty would be $1 40. 
The same absurdity will be presented at and near each of the 
minimum points. What an inducement, then, does this amend- 
ment present for the commission of fraud! If the importer can, 
by any means, introduce foreign woollens into this country — 
which cost more than fifty cents abroad — at that price, or under 
it, he will save $112 per yard in the duty. This will be a direct 
premium of i 12 on each yard for the commission of fraud and 
of perjury. It presents the strongest temptation to the importer 
and the foreign manufacturer to enter into a collusion for the pur- 
pose of deceiving the custom-house officers with false invoices. If 
successful, upon a single heavy importation, they would divide an 
immense spoil. We complain at present of fraudulent invoices, 
below the real price of the article, for the purpose of escaping a 
portion of the ad valorem duty. If such practices now prevail, 
of which, however, I have heard no satisfactory evidence, who can 
foresee the frauds and the perjuries which the system of mini- 
mums recommended by the Harrisburg Convention will call into 

existence ? 

Since the last session of Congress, I have made many in- 
quiries in relation to what would be the probable operation of the 
minimum principle. The information which I have received, and 
my own reflections have confirmed me in the opinion, that they 
will disappoint the hopes of the manufacturers; unless the dis- 
tance between them should be so great, that it would be but an 
indirect mode of establishing an absolute prohibition. Such 
would certainlv be the effect of the minimums proposed by the 



32G THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

Harrisburg Convention, upon a very large proportion of woollen 
goods. They would at once prohibit more than one-half of all 
the woollens at present imported into the country. 

The gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. Bates] has enter- 
tained us with an amusing and ingenious conceit. In order to 
illustrate his opinion of the absurdity of the bill recommended 
by the committee, he has imagined a peninsula, at the isthmus of 
which it was necessary to erect a wall, for the purpose of keep- 
ing out the ocean. He says the bill of the committee is this wall. 
It rises at first 1600 inches, then it sinks down to 32 inches, from 
which it rises perpendicularly till it reaches the height of 78 
inches, from which it sinks to 40 inches — it then rises 100 inches, 
from which it again sinks to 40 inches. I am astonished that 
whilst the gentleman was building this wall, he did not feel the 
absurdity of the minimum system, generally. It is a correct 
delineation of it. The best rule by which to ascertain the correct- 
ness and congruity of a figure of speech, is to suppose the image 
which it presents were transferred to the canvass, and then to 
contemplate it as a picture. What kind of a spectacle would the 
mason work of the gentleman thus present ? The system to which 
he is friendly would appear still more ridiculous. The wall 
which he is anxious we should erect, would rise at first 5600 
inches, then it would sink to 56 inches, after which it would rise 
to 275 inches, from which it would again sink to 56 inches ; 
it would then rise to 90 inches, from which it would again sink 
to 56 inches. The wall which the gentleman desires to erect, 
as well as that recommended by the committee, would leave 
the peninsula exposed at each of the low points. The waters 
would there rush in, and soon make fatal breaches. The foreign 
manufacturer will prepare his goods so as to send them into this 
country at the minimum points ; and thus, by fraudulent invoices, 
he will introduce vast quantities of his manufactures, at a lower 
rate of duty than our laws intended. The protection expected 
from minimums will turn out to be in a great degree vain and 
illusory. They are novel — unprecedented expedients — which 
have never been sanctioned by experience. In practice, I believe 
they will be mere cjuack medicine; and although at first they may 
impose upon the people, they will at last meet the fate which they 
merit. 

It has been said that they are sanctioned by the example of 
the cotton minimum of 30 cents per square yard. This I deny. 
There is a striking difference between a single minimum, such as 



1828] DUTIES ON WOOLLENS 327 

exists, in relation to cotton goods, and a graduated scale of mini- 
mums rising the one above the other, such as is now proposed in 
regard to woollens. Where there is but one minimum there can 
be no temptation to commit fraud. If the costs be below that 
minimum, you pay the minimum duty ; if above it, you pay a duty 
ad valorem. Under the operation of the proposed system we 
have seen that, if you get one cent above the first minimum, it 
makes a difference of $i 12 in the duty. But if the cost rises 
above the single cotton minimum, the article pays only an ad 
valorem duty of 25 per cent. There is another strong objection 
to this system. We are the representatives of the people; and 
in passing laws for their government, we should make them so 
plain that the wayfaring man in the wilderness could understand 
their provisions. We have no right to render them unintelligible. 
I ask, then, how can it be expected that our constituents will 
understand the effect of these minimums, when we have differed 
so much among ourselves as to their operation? 

The gentleman from New York [Mr. Storrs] yesterday pro- 
fessed, and I hope felt, great solicitude for the wool growers ; but 
the principles upon which he argued against the bill reported by 
the committee, would prove that the Woollen bill of last winter, 
which he supported, would have afforded the manufacturer no 
additional protection. That bill left the present rate of ad 
valorem duty unchanged. In this respect the present bill is bet- 
ter for the manufacturers. The gentleman has taken the mini- 
mum points, and has shown that at the first of them the present 
rate of duty is not increased. He might have taken every point 
of the celebrated Woollens bill, and proved the same position. 1 f 
the gentleman, instead of the first minimum point, had descended 
to the intermediate price of 25 cents, he would have found that 
the present rate of duty was increased to 65 per cent. So, at the 
second minimum, cloth costing $1 the square yard will pay a duty 
of about 36 per cent, ad valorem ; but when you descend to the 
intermediate price of 75 cents, such cloths will pay 54 per cent, 
ad valorem, and this rate of duty will rise still higher as you 
descend lower, until you reach the first minimum of 50 cents. ^ I 
wish to exhibit before the people the additional protection which 
we intend to bestow in its true light. I wish to increase the 
present rate of ad valorem duty. Then the nation will clearly 
understand our legislation; and we ourselves shall not be voting 
in the dark. I have arrived at the conclusion that minimums. 
unless they should be planted so far apart as to produce prohib,- 



328 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

tion, whilst they will confer no great benefit upon the manufac- 
turers, will deceive the people, and will blind the judgment of this 
House. 

If the measure proposed by the Harrisburg Convention 
should be adopted, there is great danger that it may give birth to 
a system of smuggling which would deprive the manufacturer of 
all the encouragement which we intended to give. Under that 
proposition the one half of all the woollen goods imported into 
the country would pay a duty of more than loo per cent. What 
a temptation would this present? Considering the vast extent 
of our coast, the people of the United States would be more than 
men, if some of them should not attempt to reap the golden har- 
vest which smuggling would present. It would be a miracle if 
all should be so pure, that none would yield to the temptation. 
If you once corrupt the morals of the people in this respect, it 
will be like the letting out of waters. It will at last overwhelm 
all the protection which your laws intended to afford to domestic 
manufactures. 

If you wish to adopt a prohibitory system you have not 
selected the proper course. You should follow the example of 
Napoleon. You should pass a direct prohibition, and confiscate 
and burn all foreign woollens which you can find in the country. 
This is the only mode by which you can carry prohibitory laws 
into effect. As long as you permit goods to enter the country at 
all, the higher 3'^our duties, the greater the temptation to evade 
them. Let us, then, tread in the plain path of our predecessors. 
The duty is now 23^3 P^^ cent, ad valorem. Let us raise it so 
much as to afford a fair protection to the woollen manufacturers. 
The people will then understand what we are doing. This has 
ever been my opinion. I was prepared to say much more, but shall 
refrain. I have performed a duty which I owed both to my 
constituents and myself in moving to strike out these minimums. 
I will not say that I shall vote in favor of no bill which shall 
contain minimums; but if I should, I shall do it with reluctance. 
I have examined the bill reported by the committee with the 
utmost care : I have taken the half-way points between the mini- 
mums, and have considered the effect of the bill, both below and 
above them : and I have arrived at the conclusion, that the bill, if 
it could be fairly executed, would afford more protection than an 
additional duty of 15 per cent, ad valorem; although at the mini- 
mum points the increase of ad valorem duty is but small. I shall 
not trespass further upon the patience of the committee. 



18^8] SALE OF PUBLIC LANDS 329 

REMARKS, MARCH 31, 1828, 

ON THE SALE OF CERTAIN PUBLIC LANDS.' 

Mr. Buchanan was persuaded that neither his friend from 
Georgia, nor any other person, could show the distinction between 
the terms exclusive jurisdiction, and exclusive legislation, as ap- 
plied to the acts of Congress. Jurisdiction is the right to pre- 
scribe laws, and whoever has this, has supreme power. The two 
words were, in his judgment, as here used, precisely synonymous. 
The right of jurisdiction was entirely distinct from the right of 
property. He could not think there was any need to send the 
bill back to the committee for such an amendment. He would 
willingly have consented to substitute the word legislation for the 
word jurisdiction, had he known it would have gratified any 
eentleman, but since the bill had now been read a third time, he 
considered it improper to delay its passage for a difference be- 
tween two words which were the same in substance. 

The debate was further continued by Messrs. Wright, Gil- 
mer, Mercer, Livingston, and Buchanan, when, at the suggestion 
of Mr. Wright, the motion of Mr. Gilmer for the recommitment 
of the bill, was withdrawn, and the proposed alteration was made 
by unanimous consent of the House. 

Mr. Buchanan briefly explained the several sections of the 
bill, in order. The United States are proprietors of land, which 
is in a course of sale. Certain forts, which were once on the 
frontier, have now, by the progress of settlement, come to be 
in the interior; they are no longer of any use, and the bill is in- 
tended to authorize their sale. The second section provides that 
the President may treat with the State authorities in relation to 
the jurisdiction over these forts; and the third section allows the 
owners, where private persons, to release their title to the United 
States.' He hoped the gentleman from New York would not 
require a whole week to consider the bill. 



^Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828. IV., part 2, pp. 2052. 
2053. 



330 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

SPEECH, APRIL 1-2, 1828, 

ON THE TARIFF BILL.' 

Mr. Buchanan, whose speech had been broken off by the 
rising of the committee yesterday, now conchided his remarks 
in reply to Mr. Sprague, in opposition to the amendment proposed 
by that gentleman. 

[The annexed is a full report of Mr. Buchanan's Speech:] 

Mr. Chairman: The gentleman from Maine [Mr. Sprague] 
has treated the Com. on Manufactures with too much severity. 
There was a bitterness of feeling manifested towards them, in 
some of his remarks, which I did not expect from that gentle- 
man. He has even attempted to turn them into ridicule by 
comparing them with '* the three wise men of Gotham, who went 
to sea in a bowl." This respectable committee have not only been 
denounced upon this floor ; but I have been informed, upon the 
best authority, that thousands of pamphlets are now on their way 
to every portion of the Union, under the frank of members of 
Congress, charging them with insincerity, and with an intention 
to destroy that interest which they were bound to protect. 

I take leave to tell the gentleman from Maine, it is not upon 
such declarations, whether they be made publicly in debate, upon 
this floor, or be circulated privately, in pamphlets, by members of 
this House, throughout the nation, that the American people will 
form their judgment. They will judge justly and impartially. 
They will look to actions rather than words. For the purpose of 
enabling them to decide who are the sincere friends of domestic 
industry, I shall, if I should be able to procure them, frank two 
or three hundred copies of the gentleman's speech, in pamphlet 
form, into my district. 

In the remarks which I intend to make, I shall confine myself 
strictly to a reply to the arguments of the gentleman from Maine. 
I shall not attempt to follow him in his splendid career of elo- 
quence. Even if I were able, upon any occasion, to be eloquent. 
Heaven defend me from such objects as hemp and molasses ! Of 
all themes, for rhetorical effect, they are the very worst. 

The gentleman commenced his remarks by asserting, that it 
had already been determined, we would afford no additional pro- 
tection to wool and woollens ; and that the provisions of the bill 



^ Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part 2, pp. 2089- 

2TI0. 



1828] SPEECH ON TARIFF BILL 331 

reported by the committee, if enacted into a law, would ruin both 
the wool grower and the manufacturer. After having assumed 
these positions, the gentleman proceeded to attack almost every 
other item of the bill. 

Is the statement of the gentleman correct, that the bill affords 
no additional protection to the grower and manufacturer of wool? 
What is the truth of the case? I have felt, and still feel anxious, 
that a tariff should pass during the present session. No slight 
difference of opinion shall prevent me from giving such votes as 
shall be best calculated to accomplish this purpose. I gave the 
strongest evidence of such a disposition, when, a few days ago, I 
moved to strike out the minimums from the second amendment, 
offered by the gentleman from Vermont, [Mr. Mallary.] Had 
my proposition prevailed, fifty per cent, would have been added 
to the present rate of duty upon woollen goods, costing more 
than thirty-three and a third cents the square yard; whilst one 
hundred per cent, would have been added to the duty upon some 
of those articles costing less than that amount. I distinctly de- 
clared to the committee that I was prepared to vote for such a 
measure. This was a greater increase of ad valorem duty than 
has ever been made by Congress at one time upon any other 
article. How was this proposition received? Was there a single 
member from the Eastern States willing to meet the spirit of 
compromise which dictated my motion ? No, sir. The language 
of one and all of them has been — We must have the amendment, 
in regard to woollens, recommended by the Harrisburg Conven- 
tion, or we will have nothing. I did not expect support from 
the Southern members, because they are opposed, in principle, to 
any further protection to domestic manufactures. Deserted by 
both the East and the South, I found myself in a slender minority 
of thirty or forty votes; and thus ended my attempt to con- 
ciliate. 

In the course of the debate upon my proposed amendment, 
the gentleman from New York, [Mr. Storrs,] to use a homely 
figure, let the cat out of the bag. He had been most laboriously 
employed, in making calculations, to ascertain whether the bill 
reported by the committee, or my amendment, afforded the greater 
protection to the woollen manufacturers. I am rejoiced, that upon 
that occasion, he descended from the lofty flight to which he 
usually soars, to figures; which, judging from his observations 
some days ago, I had thought he despised. His calculations 
brought him to the conclusion, that the bill was better for the 



332 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

manufacturers than the addition of fifty, and, on some articles, 
one hundred per cent., to the present rate of duty. His speech 
has gone to the world. 

I shall cheerfully submit to the public judgment whether the 
bill, although I dislike the minimum principle which it contains, 
does not afford sufficient protection to the manufacturers of 
woollens. I think it does ; but I wish to be distinctly understood, 
in relation to myself, that I always stand ready, in a fair spirit, 
to do everything in my power to promote the passage of a just 
and judicious tariff, which shall be adequate for their protection ; 
and that, for the sake of conciliation, and to effect this purpose, I 
am willing to sacrifice individual opinion to a considerable extent. 

What, Sir, is the American System ? Is it the system advo- 
cated by the gentleman from Maine, which would build up one 
species of domestic industry at the expense of all the rest, which 
would establish a prohibition and consequent monopoly in favor 
of the woollen manufacturer whilst it denied all protection to the 
farmer? Certainly not. The American System consists in af- 
fording equal and just legislative protection to all the great inter- 
ests of the country. It is no respecter of persons. It does not 
distinguish between the farmer who plows the soil in Pennsyl- 
vania and the manufacturer of wool in New England. Being 
impartial, it embraces all. There is, in one respect, a striking dif- 
ference between the farmer, the merchant, and the manufacturer. 
The farmer eating the bread of toil, but of independence, scarcely 
ever complains. If he suffers, he suffers in silence; you rarely 
hear him, upon this floor, asking redress for his grievances. He 
relies with that confidence which belongs to his character upon the 
justice of his country, and does not come here with importunate 
demands. The case is different in regard to the manufacturer and 
the merchant. When they feel themselves aggrieved — when they 
require the aid of your legislation, then complaints ring through- 
out the country, from Georgia to Maine. They never cease to 
ask, until they obtain. And shall this contented and uncomplain- 
ing disposition of the great agricultural interest, be used as an 
argument upon this floor against affording it relief? I trust not. 

The o-entleman from Maine has shown himself to be a true 
disciple of the Harrisburg Convention School. Even that con- 
vention, although the chief objects of their regard appeared to 
be wool and woollens, recommended further protection to iron, 
hemp, flax, and the articles manufactured from them, and to 
domestic distilled spirits. The gentleman from Maine has moved 



1828] SPEECH ON TARIFF BILL 333 

to strike from the bill additional duties which it proposes upon 
the importation of foreign hemp and molasses ; and in his speech, 
he has argued against any additional duties either upon iron, or 
steel, or flax, or foreign spirits. In his opinion, therefore, the 
American System can embrace no other interest except that of 
the growers and manufacturers of wool. 

[Here Mr. Sprague explained. He said his observations 
upon the other items, besides those he had moved to strike from 
the bill, were only intended to illustrate what would be their 
effect on the navigating interest.] 

Mr. Buchanan resumed. I perceive, from the gentleman's 
explanation, I did not misunderstand his argument. If this be 
the American System, I should like to know it as soon as pos- 
sible ; for then I shall be opposed to it. I venture to assert that, 
if those with whom the gentleman from Maine usually acts upon 
this floor have embraced the opinions which he has avowed, it is 
a vain, a culpable waste of time to proceed further with this dis- 
cussion. Let the bill at once go to the tomb of all the Capulets. 
If the New England manufacturer must be protected, whilst the 
Pennsylvania farmer is abandoned — if this be the American Sys- 
tem, instead of being a mourner at its funeral, I shall rejoice that 
it has met the fate which it deserved, and has been consigned to 
an early grave. 

The Legislature of Pennsylvania has given us what, in my 
opinion, is the correct version of the American System. They 
have declared that *' the best interests of our country demand that 
every possible exertion should be made to procure the passage of 
an act of Congress imposing such duties as will enable our manu- 
facturers to enter into fair competition with foreign manufac- 
turers, and protect the farmer, the growers of hemp and wool, 
and the distiller of spirits from domestic materials, against foreign 
competition. The people of Pennsylvania do not ask for such a 
tariff as would secure to any one class, or to any section of the 
country, a monopoly. They want a system of protection which 
will extend its blessings, as well as its burdens, as equally as pos- 
sible over every part of the Union ; to be uniform in its operation 
upon the rich as well as the poor." They have therefore in- 
structed their Senators, and requested their Representatives, " to 
procure, if practicable, the establishment of such a tariff as will 
afford additional protection to our domestic manufactures, espe- 
cially of woollen and fine cotton goods, glass, and such other 
articles as, in their opinion, require the attention of Congress, so 



334 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

as to enable our citizens fairly to compete with foreign enterprise, 
capital, and experience, and give encouragement to the citizens of 
the grain-growing States, by laying an additional duty upon the 
importation of foreign spirits, flax, china ware, hemp, wool, and 
bar iron." 

This resolution speaks a language which I am proud to hear 
from the Legislature of my native State. 

If it be the disposition of a majority of the members of this 
committee to strike out of the bill iron, hemp, foreign spirits and 
molasses, no Representative from the State of Pennsylvania, who 
regards either the interest or the wishes of his constituents, will 
dare to vote for what would then remain. The time has forever 
past when such a measure could have received our sanction. We 
shall have no more exclusive tariffs for the benefit of any one 
portion of the Union. The tariff of 1824 partook much of this 
character; it contained no additional duty on foreign spirits or 
molasses, and only added five dollars per ton to the duty on 
foreign hemp. So far as the grain-growing States expected to 
derive peculiar benefits from that measure, they have been, in a 
great degree, disappointed. 

What was the course which gentlemen pursued in relation 
to the woollen bill of the last session ? I endeavored to introduce 
into it a small protection for our hemp and domestic spirits. We 
were then told that my attempt would endanger the fate of the bill ; 
that the period of the session was too late to introduce amend- 
ments; and that if we w^ould then extend protection to the manu- 
facturers of wool, a similar protection should, at a future time, be 
extended to the agricultural interest of the grain-growing States. 
My respectable colleague [Mr. Forward] has informed the com- 
mittee that he voted for the bill of the last session under that 
delusion. How sadly the picture is now reversed ! When an inter- 
est in New England, which has been estimated at 40,000,000 of 
dollars, is at stake, and is now about to sink, as has been alleged, 
for want of adequate protection, it seems that gentlemen from 
that portion of the Union would rather consign it to inevitable 
destruction than yield the protection which the present bill will 
afford to the productions of the Middle and Western States. If 
they are prepared to act upon a policy so selfish, let them at once 
declare it, and not waste weeks upon a bill which can never 
become a law. 

The gentleman from Maine endeavored to sustain his motives 
by attempting to prove that, if the duties proposed by the bill 



1828] SPEECH ON TARIFF BILL 335 

should be imposed upon hemp and molasses, it would injure, nay, 
probably destroy the navigation of the country. Indeed he pro- 
nounced its epitaph. It is gone! Five cents per gallon upon 
molasses, and twenty-five dollars per ton upon hemp will sink our 
navigating interest ; will sweep our vessels from the ocean ! When 
I compare the storm of eloquence and of argument which the 
gentleman has employed to strike out hemp and molasses from 
this bill, with the object to be attained, he reminded me — 

" Of ocean into tempest tost 
To waft a feather or to drown a fly." 

An additional duty of five cents per gallon on molasses and 
twenty-five dollars per ton upon hemp will consign the navigation 
of the country to inevitable and almost immediate destruction ! 
This is the kind of argument which the gentleman has thought 
proper to address to the committee. 

The gentleman from Maine has said that our navigation 
goes abroad unprotected to struggle against the world; and he 
has expatiated at length upon this part pf the subject. I trust 
I shall be able to prove, without fatiguing the committee, that 
no interest belonging to this or any other country ever received a 
more continued or a more efficient protection than the navigation 
of the United States. I heartily approve this policy. I would 
not, if I could, withdraw from it an atom of the protection which 
it now enjoys. I shall never attempt to array the great and lead- 
ing interests of the country against each other. I am neither the 
exclusive advocate of commerce, of manufactures, or of agricul- 
ture. The American System embraces them all. I am the advo- 
cate of all. When, therefore, I attempt to show to the commit- 
tee the protection which has been extended by this government to 
its navigation, I do it in reply to the argument of the gentleman 
from Maine, and not in a spirit of hostility to that important 
interest. 

In this attempt, I shall be greatly assisted by the remarks 
which I made in 1824, in reply to a then distinguished member 
of this House, from Massachusetts, [Mr. Webster.] Although 
many of the arguments which have been urged by the gentleman 
from Maine, bear a striking resemblance to those to which I then 
replied, yet I do not accuse him of plagiarism. The gentleman 
from Massachusetts, who is now the advocate of the American 
System, then led the van in favor of the doctrine of free trade. 
He was, upon that occasion, the member who replied to the great 



336 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

speech which the present Secretary of State dehvered, in support 
of our protecting pohcy. 

The act imposing duties on tonnage was the third act which 
passed the Congress of the United States. It became a law on 
the 20th July, I/SQ- The act was afterwards repealed by the 
act of 20th July, 1790, which, however, re-enacted in substance 
the same provisions. Whilst these acts declare that ships or 
vessels of the United States, arriving from any foreign port or 
place, shall pay a duty of only six cents per ton upon each entry, 
they enact that all foreign vessels shall pay a duty of fifty cents 
per ton : What, then, was the extent of this protection against 
foreign competition? For the purpose of illustration, I shall 
follow the example of the gentleman from Maine, and make my 
calculations, throughout, upon a vessel of three hundred tons 
burthen. Under these laws, the tonnage duty which such an 
American vessel paid upon each entry, was only 18 dollars, whilst 
that levied upon a foreign vessel, of the same burthen, amounted 
to 150 dollars. I ask the gentleman, is this no protection? In 
addition to these discriminating duties in favor of our own 
tonnage, our laws, from the origin of the Federal Government, 
have added 10 per cent, to the rates of duties upon articles, when 
imported into this country in a foreign vessel. 

In examining the debates of the first Congress, upon the sub- 
ject of these discriminating duties in favor of our own navigation, 
I find they were strenuously opposed — upon the very principles 
which the gentleman from Maine has urged, in opposition to 
hemp and iron. It was then said, that this discrimination in 
favor of our navigation, would operate as a tax upon the farmer 
and planter, with whose produce our vessels were to be freighted, 
and that, for their benefit, there should be a fair competition be- 
tween foreign and domestic tonnage. Experience has already 
demonstrated the fallacy of this argument, as it will demonstrate 
that of the gentleman from Maine, in case native hemp and native 
iron should be protected. If you select proper objects for pro- 
tection, the inevitable consequence of the American System is, 
eventually to reduce, not to increase, prices. Domestic compe- 
tition will always ensure this result. 

What, sir, was the effect of this legislative protection upon 
our tonnage and navigation? Let Mr. Pitkin and Dr. Seybert 
answer this question. Mr. Pitkin, in his View, declares that, 
"■ these extra charges on navigation and commerce of foreign na- 
tions, were sufficient to drive from our ports the greatest propor- 



1828] SPEECH ON TARIFF BILL 337 

tion of the foreign tonnage. All foreign nations were affected 
by the system we had adopted in favor of the ship owners in the 
United States. The diminution of the foreign tonnage employed 
in our trade was, with very few exceptions, rapid, regular and 
permanent." Dr. Seybert, in his Statistical Annals, bears the same 
testimony. He states that our " discriminations operated power- 
fully in favor of our shipping. Vessels, not of the United States, 
of 200 tons burthen, on entering our ports, paid twenty pounds 
sterling, tonnage duty, and, for a cargo of £2,000 sterling, they 
paid £15 sterling, extra duty, more than did the vessels of the 
United States, of the same tonnage, and laden as aforesaid. 
These extra charges were sufficient to drive from our ports the 
greatest proportion of the foreign tonnage. All foreign nations 
were affected by the system we had adopted ; it seemed to operate 
like magic in favor of the ship owners in the United States. The 
diminution of the foreign tonnage employed in our trade, was, 
with very few exceptions, rapid, regular, and permanent." 

On the 27th March, 1804, the Congress of the United States 
enacted, " that a duty of fifty cents per ton, to be denominated 
' light money,' shall be levied and collected on all ships or vessels 
not of the United States," " to be levied and collected in the same 
manner, and under the same regulations, as the tonnage duties 
now imposed by law." This act increased the tonnage duty upon 
the entry of foreign vessels, from fifty cents to one dollar; and 
therefore, according to the existing laws, whilst American vessels 
upon each entry, pay a duty of only six cents per ton, foreign 
vessels pay one dollar. These acts are still in force, and apply 
to the navigation of all nations who have not, either by treaty, 
or otherwise, embraced the offer contained in the act of the 3d 

March, 181 5. 

This early and wise protection, which operated so powerfully 
in favor of our foreign tonnage, was still more decisive in its 
effect upon the tonnage employed in our coasting trade. In this 
trade, the voyages from port to port of the United States, being, 
comparatively speaking, but short, the burthen of fifty cents per 
ton upon each entry imposed upon foreign vessels, was so onerous, 
that, in its effect, it soon amounted to an absolute prohibition. In 
this manner, our own navigation was put in the exclusive posses- 
sion of the coasting trade, long before the act of 181 7 declared 
" that no goods, wares, or merchandise shall be imported, under 
penalty of forfeiture, thereof, from one port of the United States, 

22 



338 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

to another port of the United States, in a vessel belonging wholly 
or in part to a subject of any foreign power." 

This act, which, in express terms, prohibited foreigiiers from 
all participation in that trade, had no practical effect ; because the 
former discriminating duties had proved to be completely prohib- 
itory. 

Whilst the Congress of the United States afforded efficient 
protection to the ship owner, they did not forget the ship builder. 
The construction of ships is a most important branch of domestic 
manufactures, and one which has always been protected by prohi- 
bition. American ship builders have always enjoyed an exclusive 
protection. Your laws very properly naturalize a foreigner after 
a residence of five years, but no length of time is sufficient to 
naturalize a ship built in a foreign country. To constitute " a 
ship or vessel of the United States," it is necessary, not only that 
it should be owned by a citizen or citizens thereof, but that it 
should have been built within the same. The two exceptions to 
this general rule, embrace those vessels which are captured by our 
citizens from a public enemy, and declared to be lawful prize, 
and those which are condemned for a violation of the revenue 
laws. There never was a period, in the history of the Federal 
Government, when an American citizen could purchase from a 
foreign ship builder, a vessel built in a foreign country, and have 
her so naturalized under our laws, as to free her from the imposi- 
tion of our discriminating duties. The ship builder and the 
navigator have always moved hand in hand. The same kind of 
encouragement was afforded to both, and the same success at- 
tended that encouragement. We are now able to manufacture 
ships much cheaper, as I shall show hereafter, than they can be 
manufactured in Great Britain. 

In the two jfirst acts of Congress, to which I have referred, 
imposing duties on tonnage, there is a provision which shows with 
how much solicitude we regarded the manufacture of ships. They 
contain an exception in favor of vessels built within the United 
States, and belonging to foreigners. Upon such ships the ton- 
nage duty of fifty cents, exacted upon each entry of a foreign 
vessel, was reduced to thirty cents. And yet, after all the pro- 
tection which has been extended to our ship building and navi- 
gation, if we are to rely upon the argument of the gentleman from 
Maine, these great interests of the country are in the very grasp of 
death; and the small additional imposts, upon hemp and iron, 



1828] SPEECH ON TARIFF BILL 339 

proposed by this bill, will probably be the last ounce which will 
break the back of the camel ! 

The navigation employed in our coasting trade is completely 
protected, from all foreign competition. It enjoys a monopoly. 
Would it then be unreasonable, if the domestic growers of hemp, 
and manufacturers of iron, should demand at your hands a 
similar prohibition in their favor; so far as respects the hemp and 
iron necessary for the construction and repair of those vessels 
which are employed in that trade? They have made no such 
demand. We propose no prohibitory duty. The Committee of 
Manufactures have proceeded with great moderation in framing 
their bill. Indeed I think they are justly liable to censure for the 
slight — the insignificant additional protection of ten cents per 
gallon upon foreign spirits. I ask, should the duty be less upon a 
gallon of foreign spirits, than upon a gallon of Madeira wine, 
which, under the existing law, pays one dollar? They should 
both be taxed as articles of luxury. If the rich choose to indulge 
in their use, let them pay for that indulgence. Indeed, the argu- 
ment is much stronger in favor of a higher duty on foreign spirits, 
than on Madeira wine. The use of that wine interferes with no 
domestic production; whilst each gallon of foreign spirits con- 
sumed in the country, takes the place of a gallon domestic 
spirits distilled from the grain of the farmer. 

But I have digressed from my subject. Our foreign naviga- 
tion, like every other interest which has been judiciously selected, 
soon required no protection to sustain it. By the year 1815, it 
had become so powerful, that it was prepared to contend against 
the navigation of the world. All it wanted was a fair field, and 
the blessing of Heaven upon the contest. The infant had become 
a giant, ready to go forth, glorying in his might and confident of 
victoiy. It then needed no discriminating duties for its protec- 
tion. It desired nothing but an equal competition with the world. 
This Government, since that time, has devoted itself with as 
much anxiety and zeal to obtain for it a free trade with all nations 
as it had done to protect its infancy against foreign competition. 
Its true interest equally dictated both systems of policy. By the 
act of the 3d March, 181 5, we declared that we would admit into 
our ports the vessels of every nation, carrying articles the produce 
or manufacture of such nation, without levying any other tonnage 
or impost duty than was levied on American vessels; provided, 
such nation would admit into their ports American vessels, laden 
with American produce or manufactures, without imposing any 



340 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

impost or tonnage duty beyond that which was paid by their own 
vessels. This act proclaimed a challenge to the world. It was 
the foundation of all our future policy in regard to navigation. 
Its wisdom has been tested by experience. We know that no 
nation on earth can compete with our navigation upon equal 
terms. 

A few years after the passage of this act, we embarked in 
what was considered by many a knight-errant expedition, in favor 
of our navigation. The long established policy of Great Britain 
had locked up her colonial possessions, against the navigation of 
all other nations. She thought she had a right to maintain this 
monopoly. In the face of all her ancient prejudices in favor of 
her own navigation, the Congress of the United States passed a 
law in April, 1818, which declared, " that the ports of the United 
States shall be and remain closed against every vessel owned 
wholly, or in part, by a subject or subjects of His Britannic 
Majesty, coming, or arriving from any port or place that is, or 
shall be, by the ordinary laws of navigation or trade, closed 
against vessels owned by citizens of the United States." The 
provisions of this act were considerably extended by those of the 
supplementary act of May, 1820. 

Upon whom did the navigating interest of the country rely, 
for achieving a victory over the British colonial policy? Upon 
the patriotism and perseverance of the farmers and planters of 
your country. They are the persons who were chiefly injured 
in this struggle. The British Government were willing that there 
should be a direct trade between our country and their colonies-, 
but they insisted, that it should be carried on exclusively in their 
own vessels. To the farmer or planter, it could make little dif- 
ference, whether his products were carried to the \\'^est Indies 
in an English or an American vessel. In either case, they could 
be exchanged for the same quantity of the products of those 
Islands. The contest was altogether for the carriage ; and its re- 
sult depended chiefly upon the question — whether our citizens, in- 
terested in the trade of the British colonies, or those colonists, 
could the longest, and with the most fortitude, endure its destruc- 
tion. I well recollect the very able memorial from Norfolk, which 
painted, in glowing colors, the extreme distress to which the loss 
of that trade harl given birth. It declared, that under the opera- 
tion of the existing laws, their farmers, their merchants, their 
dealers in timber and lumber, in fact all classes of their citizens, 
were deprived, in a great measure, of their former resources, and 



1828] SPEECH ON TARIFF BILL 341 

were, many of them, burdened with debts which they are unable 
to pay. I also recollect the very able and satisfactory report which 
you, [Mr. Newton.] as Chairman of the Committee of Com- 
merce, presented upon the subject. It convinced me, that the 
policy which we were then pursuing, was correct. At length the 
farmers — and other citizens of this country — at the expense of 
much pecuniary suffering, extorted from the British Government 
the act of Parliament of the 24th June, 1822. By this act, Great 
Britain surrendered her monopoly, and opened her West India 
trade to our navigation. 

In what manner have we now lost that trade? The gentle- 
man from Maine has thought proper to introduce this question 
into the debate, and I shall follow him in my reply. The patience 
and the perseverance of our agriculturists compelled Great Britain 
to open her colonial ports. How have they been closed? The 
gentleman casts the blame altogether upon the British Govern- 
ment. I do not stand here as the apologist of that Government. 
It is probable they were glad to be furnished with so good a 
pretext for closing their colonial ports against our navigation, as 
the conduct of the present Administration afforded. 

But, sir, is it not an historical fact — for the truth of which 
I appeal to every gentleman upon this floor, that Great Britain, in 
1824, offered to regulate, by treaty, our trade with her colonies, 
which she had opened in 1822, by legislation ? Werenot the terms 
which she proposed perfectly satisfactory to our government, 
with a single exception ? We insisted that our productions should 
be admitted into the British West Indies, upon the same terms 
with those of the British colony of Canada. Great Britain re- 
sisted this attempt upon our part, to dictate the manner in which 
she should regulate her own trade, between her own colonies. 
She said, that to abandon this power would be a forfeiture of her 
independence. Upon this point, and this alone, was the negotia- 
tion suspended. It was in our power, at any time within two 
years, to have nailed Great Britain fast to the counter. She could 
not, in the face of the world, have violated her plighted faith, 
without losing her character among the nations. Yet this offer 
of a treaty (which, it is now admitted by all, we ought to have 
accepted) was not accepted, until the time had passed when it 
was in our power to obtain it. 

Wliat have been the consequences of the loss of our direct 
trade with the West Indies ? The President of the United States, 
in his last annual message, has told us, that neither our com- 



342 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

merce, nor our navigation, nor our revenue, has suffered in conse- 
quence of its loss. He has not informed us — he could not inform 
us — that our agriculture has not suffered. What is the present 
course of this trade? The owners of the agricultural products 
which are carried to the West Indies pay two freights, instead of 
one. This is also the case in regard to the productions of the 
West Indies which are brought to this country. An American 
vessel, laden with flour, proceeds to one of the neutral islands. 
She thus earns her freight. Her cargo is landed, is subjected to 
a mercantile profit. A British vessel then arrives, and carries the 
same cargo from the neutral to the British island ; and thus she 
earns her freight also. There are two voyages instead of one, 
both going to and returning from the British West Indies. Thus 
both British and American navigation flourish. Each enjoys the 
same, or nearly the same profits, to which both are entitled ; and 
the agricultural interest pays the whole additional expense. Well 
might the President inform us our navigation had not been 
injured by the loss of the direct trade. I am opposed to this 
trade, as it is now conducted. It is a heavy burthen upon agricul- 
ture. I trust that a Minister may speedily be sent to England, and 
that we may ascertain whether it is the intention of Great Britain 
thus for ever to shackle this trade. If it be so, I care not what 
administration may be in power, it shall be sustained by me, in 
any reasonable attempt to obtain justice from the government of 
that country. 

Some time ago, I received a letter from a gentleman in Vir- 
ginia, which contained much able argument and valuable informa- 
tion. Among other things, it refers to the opinion of a distin- 
guished gentleman, late our minister to England, but now no 
more, upon the subject of foreign spirits and molasses. That 
gentleman (of whom I never have spoken, and never shall speak, 
but in terms of the highest respect,) when the bill concerning 
navigation was before the Senate, which was afterwards enacted 
into a law, on the i8th of April, 1818, made the following re- 
marks : " We have the power, and hereafter it may become our 
policy, as it is that of other countries, to resort to a regulation, the 
effect of which would go far to balance any disadvantage arising 
from the loss of the English colonial markets. We import annu- 
ally upwards of six millions gallons of rum, more than half of 
which comes from the English colonies. We also import, every 
year, near seven millions of gallons of molasses ; as every gallon 
of molasses yields, by distillation, a gallon of rum. the rum im- 



1828] SPEECH ON TARIFF BILL 343 

ported, added to that distilled from imported molasses, is probably 
equal to twelve millions of gallons, which enormous quantity is 
chiefly consumed by citizens of the United States. 

" If the importation of rum and molasses for distillation be 
prohibited, it would require four millions of bushels of grain for 
distillation, to supply an equal quantity of ardent spirits, and in 
this way, our agriculture would be indemnified for the loss it 
might suffer by losing the English colonial markets." 

We have not lost the English colonial markets, but we have 
lost our direct trade with them. The event which Mr. King 
apprehended, has now, in a considerable degree, become matter 
of history. The contingency has happened; and yet what have 
the Committee on Manufactures recommended ? The prohibition 
of foreign spirits and molasses, which Mr. King suggested? No! 
merely an addition of ten cents per gallon to the present duty 
paid by foreign spirits, and five cts. per gallon to the duty paid 
by molasses ; and yet, if we are to yield our faith to the arguments 
of the gentleman, this increase of duty will, in its consequences, 
destroy our fisheries, and drive our fishermen from the ocean. 

I shall mention one other example, to show with what care 
this government has fostered its navigation. France, immedi- 
ately after she was freed from the long and desolating wars in 
which she had been engaged, turned her attention towards her 
commercial marine. It was a principal object of her policy to 
increase her tonnage. For this purpose, she established discrim- 
inating duties in favor of cotton, tobacco, and potashes, imported 
in her own vessels, which were equivalent to a tonnage duty of 
from $i8 to $21 per ton. On the 15th May, 1820, we passed an 
act which imposed a countervailing duty of $18 per ton upon 
all French vessels entering the ports of the United States. The 
consequence of this measure was, the suspension, in a great degree, 
of the direct trade between this country and France. Who chiefly 
suffered by this suspension? The tobacco and cotton planters 
of the South. But they suffered with patience, because they thus 
expected to acquire for our navigation the carrying trade to 
France. We were successful, and in June, 1822, France yielded 
to our demands; and the consequence has been, that our navigation 
has acquired nearly the whole carrying trade between the two 
countries. Give our navigation an equal chance, a free and an 
open sea, and we know that we can maintain a successful competi- 
tion against the world. I ask the gentleman from Maine, after 
this review of our legislation, whether he will now say that our 



344 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

navigation has received no protection? We protected its infancy 
by our legislation; and after it had risen superior to all foreign 
competition, we have exerted all our energies to obtain for it a 
free trade, well knowing that upon equal terms, it must and would 
be successful against the navigation of any other nation. 

Let us now, sir, examine the calculation which the gentleman 
has made for the purpose of proving that our navigation cannot 
sustain the additional duties proposed by this bill, upon foreign 
hemp and foreign iron. The Committee on Manufactures, before 
they reported their bill to this House in January, 1821, addressed 
certain questions to the mercantile society of New York; two of 
which, with the answers, I shall take leave to read to the 'com- 
mittee. 

Question. What is the cost of a British ship, of say 300 tons? What 
of an American of the same force and burthen; and, generally, the differ- 
ence in the price of shipping, by the ton, in each country, completely 
equipped ? 

Answer. A British ship of 300 tons, equipped for sea, will cost $24,000, 
or $80 per ton. An American ship of the same quality, will cost $18,000, 
or 60 dollars per ton. 

Question. The quantity of iron and cordage to the 100 tons of 
shipping ? 

Answer. It will require four tons of iron, 1,500 pounds of copper 
bolts, 4l4 tons cordage, and 20 bolts of duck, to the 100 tons. 

In answer to another question, tlie same society state, that 
" foreign vessels would not have a preference, in our ports, over 
American built vessels, unless at a reduction in freight of 25 per 
cent, or advantages equivalent, at the port of destination." 

When the gentleman was estimating the additional tax, 
which he alleges this bill would impose upon the navigation of 
the country, and was comparing it with the duties imposed by the 
laws of Great Britain upon the importation of hemp and of iron, 
and their manufactures, he must have forgotten that timber was 
the great and primary material which entered into the construc- 
tion of a ship. In England they are compelled to purchase this 
article in foreign countries, and to pay the heavy expense of its 
transportation, whilst we possess it in abundance at home. This 
is the reason why a ship of 300 tons, in 1821, could have been 
built in this country for the sum of 18,000 dollars; whilst the 
same vessel in England would have cost 24,000 dollars. The 
gentleman has stated a valuable fact to the committee, in relation 
to the present cost of ship building. He has informed us that 
American vessels are built at the present time for 50 dollars per 



1828] SPEECH ON TARIFF BILL 345 

ton. If this information be correct, then the difference between 
the cost of two vessels of the same quahty, and of 300 tons 
burthen, would amount to 9,000 dollars. What then are we to 
think of an argument, intended to prove that the addition of 
378 dollars to the cost of an American vessel of 300 tons burthen, 
may probably break down our navigation, and drive our Hag 
from the ocean? A ship in England costs sixty per cent, more 
than a ship in this country. If the additional duties proposed 
by this bill should even become a permanent tax upon our ship 
building, it would amount to only 2>4 per cent, upon the first 
cost of the vessel. This would never be felt by our navigation. 
It would be but a drop compared with the ocean. It is both 
ungrateful and unjust for the navigation of the country, after 
it has been uniformly sustained by the agricultural interest, to 
turn round upon its benefactor and say, that, although you have 
protected us in infancy, and have watched over our manhood 
with parental tenderness and solicitude, yet we will not, in the day 
of your distress, grant you the trifling boon which you now 
solicit. 

But I cannot concur in opinion with the gentleman, that the 
proposed increase of duty upon the hemp and iron, and their 
manufactures, will, after a short time, be any tax upon our 
navigation. On the contrary, in a very few years, it will reduce 
the price of those articles below their present value. Upon what 
principle does our protecting policy rest? It is this : select proper 
objects, and protect their growth, or their manufacture, whilst in 
infancy, against destruction from foreign competition, and Amer- 
ican skill and American industry will soon furnish them to the 
consumer cheaper than they can be procured from abroad. This 
principle lies at the very foundation of the tariff system. Aban- 
don it, and the whole fabric is destroyed. What would the 
gentleman from Maine say to me, if I were to turn the argument 
which he has urged in opposition to hemp and iron, against wool 
and woollens? If I were thus disposed, I might say you have 
proposed a duty upon these articles, which will greatly increase 
the price of woollen cloth. The agricultural interest of the 
country is at present very much depressed. The laboring man 
who now earns his daily bread by his daily toil, can scarcely ac- 
quire wherewithal to clothe his wife and children, and protect 
them from the winds of Heaven. His family are already suffer- 
ing under the pressure of want, and will you grind him to the 
dust, by taxing the clothing which covers his nakedness. 50 per 



346 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

cent, for the benefit of the wool grower and woollen manufac- 
turer? If I were to use such an argument, and afterwards pro- 
fess to be a tariff man, I should expect no credit for sincerity. 
In voting additional protection to wool and woollens, I shall act 
upon the general principles of the system. The growth of wool 
is congenial to our country, and if we should afford sufficient 
encouragement to its manufacture, in the course of a very short 
time, the industry and enterprise of our citizens will furnish 
woollen cloth of a better quality, and at a cheaper rate, to the 
consumer, than we pay at present. The much abused Committee 
of Domestic Manufactures, in the testimony which they have 
presented with their report, have furnished to this House and the 
Nation a most cheering fact in relation to our progress in the 
woollen manufacture. The manufacturers themselves have testi- 
fied, that they can convert wool into cloth at as cheap a rate as 
they can do it in England. The only difference against them, 
consists in the higher price of wool in this country than in Great 
Britain. This inequality will not long exist. Our country is 
boundless in its capacity for the production of wool. Give us 
proper protection, and we can produce wool enough to clothe the 
world. The laborer will, therefore, eventually pay less for his 
clothing, not more. In the quantum of protection to woollens, all 
I desire is, that the duty may not suddenly be raised to such a 
standard, as will produce a great appreciation of price, and an 
immediate pressure upon the country. These are the principles 
upon which I shall act. 

If these principles be correct, in regard to wool and woollens, 
I would ask the gentleman from Maine why they do not apply, 
with equal force, to the manufacture of iron and the growth of 
hemp? Can it be for one moment doubted, that under a proper 
protection, hemp and iron can be produced cheaper at home than 
they can be procured from abroad ? We have mountains of iron 
ore in many portions of the Union, planted by the hand of nature, 
near to mountains of coal. Our water-power is unlimited ; we 
have timber in abundance: we possess the capital, the skill, and 
the enterprise. Can any gentleman then contend, that the Amer- 
ican manufacturer of iron will not soon furnish it to the con- 
sumer at a lower price than it can be transported to us from a 
distant country? That this will be the event, and that at no 
distant period, I believe as firmly as I do in my own existence. 
To doubt it, would be to cast a reflection upon the character of my 
countrymen. The additional duty which the present bill ])roposes 



1828] SPEECH ON TARIFF BILL 



347 



upon iron, is a mere trifle, and will never be felt by the consumer. 

Then, in regard to hemp, need I say anything? It has now 
been clearly ascertained, from the highest authority, that Amer- 
ican water-rotted hemp is fully equal, if not superior, to that of 
Russia. This problem has been solved, and I feel it to be a high 
honor, that I have been an humble instrument in assisting to dispel 
the delusion which had existed in regard to American hemp. In 
the year 1824, I got one of my constituents to water-rot between 
7 and 8 hundred weight of hemp. It was received at the 
navy yard in Philadelphia, by order of the Secretary of the Navy, 
and the Agent there, at once, pronounced it to be equal to the best 
water-rotted Russia hemp, and paid for it accordingly. It was 
manufactured and sent to the Mediterranean, and after an actual 
experiment of considerable length, no doubt is now entertained 
by the Commissioners of the Navy, but that it will prove to be 
fully equal, in all respects, to the best Russia hemp. Indeed, in 
one respect, the report which we have received from the Navy 
Department, awards to American hemp a decided preference. It 
declares that " the Russian hemp is certainly liable to greater 
injury from transportation, and that it does sustain more or less 
injury in its transportation from Russia to our ports, is believed 
to be an unquestionable fact." It often becomes musty in the 
hold of the vessel, in consequence of the great length of the 
voyage. 

But, says the gentleman, why is there no American water- 
rotted hemp in the market? The answer is, that the prejudices 
which have heretofore existed against it, in the public mind, have 
not yet been dispelled. Our farmers have not hitherto been 
able to dispose of it at the same price which Russia hemp has 
borne in the market. Besides, they require some encouragement 
to induce them to abandon their ancient method of dew-rotting, 
and to take to water-rotting. For this reason, the additional duty 
of 25 dollars per ton upon this article has very properly been made 
progressive, rising slowly, to give our farmers time to perfect 
themselves in the business, and to grow the article in sufficient 
quantities for the supply of our public and private ships. 

I shall say nothing of the capacity of this country to produce 
hemp. There is a single State of this Union — a State whose 
soil is naturally more fertile, in my opinion, than that of ain- 
other, of which I am reminded by the gentleman now in my eye. 
[Mr. Clark, of Kentucky,] capable of producing hemp in abund- 
ance to supply the demands of the world. 



348 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

I need not trouble the committee with any remarks in regard 
to flax ; as they would only be a repetition of what I have already 
said, concerning the cultivation and production of hemp. 

The gentleman from Maine has used a most astonishing 
argument against any further protection to hemp and flax, and 
iron. We ought not further to encourage our farmers to grow 
flax and hemp, nor our manufacturers to produce iron. And 
why? Because you will thus deprive the navigating interest of 
the freight which they earn, by carrying these articles from Rus- 
sia to this country. Can the gentleman be serious in contending 
that, for the sake of affording freight to the ship-owners, we 
ought to depend upon a foreign country for a supply of these 
articles? This argument strikes at the root of the whole Amer- 
ican System. Upon this same principle we ought not to manu- 
facture any article whatever at home, because this will deprive 
our ships of the carriage of it from abroad. This principle, had 
it been adopted in practice, would have left us where we were 
at the close of the American Revolution. We should still have 
been dependent upon foreign nations for articles of the first 
necessity. This argument amounts to a proclamation of war, 
by our navigation, against the agriculture and manufactures of 
the country. You must not produce, because we will then lose 
the carriage, is the sum and substance of the argument. Am 
I then to be seriously told, that for the purpose of encouraging 
our ship-owners, our farmers ought to be deprived of the mar- 
kets of their own country, for those agricultural productions 
which they can supply in abundance? I did not expect to have 
heard such an argument upon this floor. 

By encouraging domestic industry, wdiether it be applied to 
agriculture or manufactures, you promote the best interests of 
your navigation. You furnish it with domestic exports to scatter 
over the world. This is the true American System. It protects 
all interests ; it abandons none. It never arrays one against an- 
other. Upon the principles of the gentleman, w^e ought to sacri- 
fice all the other interests of the country to promote our naviga- 
tion. This is asking too much. 

The gentleman from Maine seems to apprehend great danger 
to the navy, from the passage of this bill. He appears to think it 
will fall with so much oppression upon our navigation and fish- 
eries, that these nurseries of seamen for the navy may be greatl}' 
injured, if not altogether destroyed. 

In regard to the value and importance of a navy to this coun- 



1828] SPEECH ON TARIFF BILL .'U9 

try, I cordially agree with the gentleman from Maine. Every 
prejudice of my youth was enlisted in its favor, and the judgment 
of riper years has strengthened and confirmed those early impres- 
sions. It is the surest bond of our Union. The Western States 
have a right to demand from this Government, that the mouth of 
the Mississippi shall be kept open, both in war and in peace. If 
you should not afford them a free passage to the ocean, you can- 
not expect to retain them in the Union; they are, therefore, as 
much, if not more, interested in cherishing the navy tiian any 
other portion of the Republic. The feeling in its favor contains 
in it nothing sectional ; it is general. We are all interested in its 
preservation and extension. Unlike standing armies, a navy 
never did, nor never will, destroy the liberties of any country. It 
is our most efficient and least dangerous arm of defence. 

To what, then, does the argument of the gentleman lead? 
Although iron, and hemp, and flax, and their manufactures, are 
essential to the very existence of a navy; yet he would make us 
dependent for them upon the will of the Emperor of Russia, or the 
Kine of Sw^eden. A statesman would as soon think of being 
dependent on a foreign nation for gunpowder, or cannon, or 
cannon balls, or muskets, as he would for the supply of iron, 
or flax, or hemp, for our navy. Even if these articles could not 
be produced as cheaply in this as in other countries, upon great 
national principles, their domestic production ought to be encour- 
aged, even if it did tax the community. They are absolutely neces- 
sary for our defence. Without them, what would become of you, 
if engaged in war with a great naval power? You would then be 
as helpless as if you were deprived of gunpowder or of cannon. 
Without them, your navy would be perfectly useless. Shall we. 
then, in a country, calculated by nature, above all others, for their 
production, refuse to lend them a helping hand ? I trust not. 

The gentleman from Maine has said much about our fish- 
eries, and^he injurious effects which the present bill will have 
upon them. From this argument. I was induced again to read the 
bill, supposing that it might possibly contain some latent provi- 
sion, hostile to the fisheries, which I had not been able to detect. 
Indeed, one might have supposed, judging merely from the re- 
marks of the gentleman, without a reference to the bill, that it 
aimed a deadlv blow against this valuable branch of our national 
industry. I could find nothing in it. which even touched the 
fisheries They have ever been special favorites of our legisla- 
tion I shall not pretend to enumerate, because the task might 



350 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

seem invidious, the different acts of Congress affording them 
protection. They are numerous. The gentleman has, in my 
opinion, been very unfortunate in his complairfts that they have 
not been sufficiently protected. From the origin of this Govern- 
ment, they have been cherished, in every possible manner, by our 
legislation. For their benefit we have adopted a system of prohi- 
bition, of drawbacks, and of bounties, unknown to our laws, in 
relation to any other subject. They have grown into national im- 
portance, and have become a great interest of the country. They 
should continue to be cherished, because they are the best nur- 
series of our seamen. I would not withdraw from them an atom 
of the protection which they have received; on the contrary, I 
should cheerfully vote them new bounties, if new bounties were 
necessary to sustain them. They are the very last interest in the 
country which ought to complain. 

The gentleman, whilst he strenuously opposed any additional 
protection to domestic iron, and domestic hemp, surely could not 
have remembered, that the productions of the fisheries enjoy a 
monopoly of the home market. The duties in their favor are so 
high as to exclude foreign competition. We do not ask such 
prohibitory duties upon foreign iron, flax, or hemp. We demand 
but a moderate increase ; and yet the fisheries, which are protected 
by prohibitory duties, meet us, and deny to us, this reasonable 
request. 

The bill contains another provision which has been assailed 
by the gentleman from Maine. It proposes to repeal the law, 
now in existence, which gives to the distiller of New England rum 
a bounty or drawback of four cents per gallon upon its exporta- 
tion to a foreign country. This provision affords to New Eng- 
land rum a decided preference over our spirits distilled from grain, 
in foreign markets. It is a discrimination which certainly ought 
to be abolished. Did the gentleman reflect, whilst he was oppos- 
ing this repeal, that, for the benefit of our fisheries, we do not 
allow any drawback of the duties upon foreign fish and foreign 
fish oil, imported into this country? The law, in effect, declares 
that if our merchants send these articles to foreign countries, 
they must be the production of our own fisheries. This is a 
remarkable case : because almost every other article, brought from 
a foreign country, may be exported in the same form in which it 
arrived, with the benefit of drawback. And yet the gentleman 
insists — although the article is changed from molasses into rum — 
that the distiller ought still to receive four cents per gallon from the 



1828] SPEECH ON TARIFF BILL 



351 



treasury, as a premium upon sending it abroad, to enter into com- 
petition with a domestic liquor, which is distilled from the grain of 
the farmer. Is this just? Is it equal? The truth is, if our 
navigating interest shall continue to oppose every measure which 
may be proposed in this House calculated to promote the agricul- 
ture of the country, there is great danger the people may at last 
begin to believe, that a hostility exists, in the nature of things, 
between these two interests. Should false alarms of this character 
ever be excited, they will seriously injure our navigation and our 
navy. ^ I would caution gentlemen, as they value these interests, 
to avoid placing them in unnatural array against the great agricul- 
tural interest of the country, upon which all others must at last 
depend. 

The gentleman has selected the year 1810, and has said, 
truly, that our foreign tonnage is not so great now as it was 
then; and that our tonnage employed in the coasting trade has 
not increased since that time, in proportion to the increase of 
our population. I ask, is this statement calculated to produce a 
fair impression ? We all know that for many years previous to 
that period, the nations of Europe had been engaged in a desolat- 
ing war ; one of the chief purposes of which appeared to be the de- 
struction of the commerce of each other. We remained neutral, 
and became the carriers for the world. This circumstance im- 
parted to our navigation a mushroom growth, and made it, in a 
great degree, dependent upon the continuance of foreign war. 
This growth had reached its utmost limit in the year 18 10. After 
peace was restored, and the belligerent nations had turned their 
attention to their own navigation, we were necessarily deprived 
of a large portion of their carrying trade. Since the year 1818, 
the time when the world had settled down in a state of peace, 
our navigation has been gradually increasing. Since then, " it 
has grown with the growth, and strengthened with the strength," 
of our country. It now depends upon our own resources for its 
support. Like the pine of our mountains, supported by its native 
soil, it defies the wintry blast. It is no longer a mushroom plant, 
of hot-house growth, which the first frost will wither. It has 
been increasing, from year to year, since 181 8, with a steady and 
natural growth, and is now in a most thriving and prosperous 
condition. 

I will now descend to the humble though important articles 
of foreign spirits and molasses; and. after having made .some 



35i THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [18^28 

observations relating to them, I shall not further trespass upon 
the attention of the committee. 

The tariff of 1824 abandoned, in a great degree, the peculiar 
interest of the grain growing States. It is true, that a distin- 
guished gentleman from Kentucky, then a Representative upon 
this floor, [Mr. Clay,] did move, in committee of the whole, to 
increase the duty on molasses, as this bill proposes, from five to 
ten cents per gallon. His argument upon that occasion was one 
of the happiest efforts he ever made upon this floor. I voted with 
him in committee of the whole; but. when the bill came into the 
House. I g-ave a contrarv vote. I was one of those mariners who 
were then willing to throw the molasses overboard, to prevent the 
ship from sinking. I found that our Eastern brethren were so 
hostile to any increased duty upon this article, that the fate of the 
bill depended upon the rejection of Mr. Clay's amendment. I 
thought it would be too selfish in me to persist in retaining a 
single article, although its retention might be peculiarly beneficial 
to my own constituents, when I believed the eft'ect would be to 
destroy a bill which contained many wise and useful provisions, 
calculated to promote the general welfare. I did what I believed 
to be right, under all the circumstances, and I have never since 
repented of my conduct. 

The case is now altered. New England, who was scarcely 
willing to accept the tariff of 1824. is now seeking protection for 
her woollen manufacturinsf interest, the value of which has been 
estimated at 40,000.000 dollars. The vote upon the question now 
before the committee must determine whether she is willing to 
grasp this protection with one hand, and with the other spurn the 
farmers of the INIiddle and Western States who are asking for a 
similar boon. Would such conduct be fair? By the tariff of 
1824, we added 8^ per cent, to the ad valorem duty which had 
formerly existed on woollen goods. Experience has shown that 
this increased duty, amounting in the whole to 33 ^-^ per cent, ad 
valorem, has not been sufficient. I am willing and anxious to 
extend further protection to this suffering interest, although there 
is not an individual in five hundred of my constituents, in that 
portion of the congressional district with which I am best ac- 
quainted, who will personally, at the present time, derive the least 
benefit from an additional tax on woollens. I say personally, 
because I freely admit that the establishment of the woollen manu- 
facture in this country is a great national object. The farmers in 
the eastern part of Pennsylvania never can. and never will, con- 



1828] SPEECH ON TARIFF BILL 353 

vert their small farms, for which they have paid large prices, into 
sheep walks. The great woollen factories are now far distant 
from them. As to the grain of the middle States which they 
consume, it is too trifling to be seriously brought into the account. 
Comparatively speaking, it is unworthy of the least consideration. 
Yet I am, as one of the representatives of that people, willing to 
act with liberality, and afford these manufactories sufficient aid ; 
but I shall expect the same liberality in return. What claims has 
the manufacturer upon us, which the farmer has not? The agri- 
cultural interest is now greatly depressed. This fact is notorious. 
It is personally known to almost every gentleman upon this floor. 
The supply of grain is every where too great for the demand. 
There is a vast surplus of labor employed in the cultivation of the 
soil. Are not the fanners the very bone and sinew of your 
country? Are they not the men who, by their virtues, must 
preserve your republican institutions uncorrupted in peace, and 
who, by their valor, must defend them in war? They are also 
the tax payers, by whom your government is supported. And is 
this the only interest in the country which is to be disregarded? 
Are commerce and manufactures to be protected, and is agricul- 
ture to be abandoned ? Can gentlemen expect aid to their woollen 
manufactories, from the representatives of farmers upon this floor. 
and at the same time refuse to aid those farmers? Will they 
take, but never give? I trust they will not act so ungenerous a 
part. 

What is the true state of the case, in regard to molasses and 
foreign spirits ? The importation of molasses during the last year 
amounted to 13,362,268 gallons. A gentleman from Vermont 
[Mr. Hunt] has informed the committee that, from the year 1822 
to 1826, both inclusive, the average annual quantity of molasses 
imported, was 12,806,948 gallons; and no doubt he is correct. 

The Committee of Manufactures have stated, in their report, 
that, for the last six years, the importation of foreign spirits has 
been between five and six millions of gallons annually. The 
gentleman from Maine [Mr. Anderson] has corrected the com- 
mittee in relation to the two last years, and has shown that in 
the year 1826 the number of gallons of foreign spirits consumed 
in the country amounted to 3,208,321; and in 1827, 3,183,186. 
And here, sir, permit me to observe, that I regret I was not pres- 
ent when that gentleman delivered his able and masterly argu- 
ment to the committee, which I have since read with great pleas- 

23 



354 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

ure; an argument which, for its spirit of concihation, was in 
perfect contrast with that of his colleague, [Mr. Sprague.] 

It may be that the estimate made by the Committee of Manu- 
factures of the quantity of molasses distilled within the United 
States is too large. It is at best only conjectural, but they have 
given good reasons for the opinion that about 8,000,000 of gallons 
of molasses are distilled in New England. The gentleman from 
Maine [Mr. Anderson] has given it as his opinion that not more 
than one-sixth of the molasses imported is distilled; whilst the 
Committee of Manufactures believe it to be about two-thirds. 
For the purpose of my argument, I shall state the distillation to be 
6,000,000 of gallons, which is considerably less than one half of 
the molasses imported during the last year, and is an intermediate 
point between the committee and the gentleman from Maine, [Mr. 
Anderson.] According to this estimate, there was imported into 
the United States, during the last year, in the form of molasses, 
six millions of gallons of foreign spirits; and in foreign spirits 
which had been distilled abroad, 3,183,186 gallons; making an 
aggregate of 9,183,186 gallons. Allowing that one bushel of 
grain can be converted into 2M gallons of spirits, which I believe 
to be about the average product from distillation, we find that 
there is annually imported into the United States, of the product 
of foreign agriculture, either in the form of spirits or of molasses, 
for the purpose of distillation, what would be equal to more than 
three million three hundred thousand bushels of grain. Without 
increasing the consumption of spirits a single gallon, if you could 
prohibit the importation of foreign spirits, and prevent the dis- 
tillation of molasses in this country, you would thus create this 
immense domestic market for the benefit of our farmers. Let 
me call the attention of gentlemen who represent agricultural 
districts to this fact. I ask, can it be the policy of an agricul- 
tural people to consume, in the form of spirits, the agricultural 
productions of foreign nations to an amount equal to more than 
three millions three hundred thousand bushels of grain, whilst 
that article is perishing at home for the want of a market? 
This simple statement of the fact must carry conviction to every 
unprejudiced mind. The farmer has a right to insist that the 
spirits manufactured from the corn and the rye which he produces 
shall be preferred by your legislation to that which is distilled 
from foreign materials. Mr. King suggested that it might be- 
come proper to prohibit the importation of foreign spirits and 
molasses altogether. What have the committee done? They 



1828] SPEECH ON TARIFF BILL 355 

have recommended an addition to the present duties of only ten 
cents per gallon on foreign spirits, and five cents on molasses; and 
this trifling increase has occasioned the storm which has been 
raised by the gentleman from Maine, [Mr. Sprague.] 

Let us view this subject in another of its aspects. Some 
gentlemen say, we are willing to give you an additional duty upon 
foreign spirits ; but you must not touch the molasses. This would 
be a mere delusion. You may impose two dollars a gallon upon 
the importation of foreign spirits, if you suffer it to come to our 
country in the shape of molasses, at five cents per gallon ; I ask 
what protection will be afforded to the grain growers? None. 
Its sole effect would be to transfer the distilleries of molasses from 
the West Indies to New England. Leave the duty upon molasses 
to remain as it is, and the increase of duty upon foreign spirits 
which the bill proposes, will afford the same protection to the 
domestic distillation of molasses, that it will afford to the domes- 
tic distillation of grain. This conclusion is irresistible. I ask, 
what kind of protection it would be to the farmer, to impose a 
heavy duty upon flour, and suffer wheat to be imported free? 
It would be a bounty to the miller, but no protection to the grain 
grower. Or what protection would it afford to the wool grower, 
to tax foreign woollens heavily, whilst you suffered the raw 
material to be imported at a trifling rate of duty ? Such a policy 
would encourage the manufacturer, but ruin the wool grower. 
Upon the same principle, I ask, what protection it would afford to 
our grain growers, if you were even to exclude foreign rum, whilst 
you admit its importation in the form of molasses, at five cents per 
gallon? Such legislation would benefit the domestic distillers of 
molasses; but there the advantage would end. The duty upon 
foreign spirits and foreign molasses must stand or fall together. 
It will be a vain attempt to endeavor to persuade the Pennsylvania 
farmer, that he will be protected against foreign rum by a high 
duty, whilst the raw material out of which this rum is manufac- 
tured, shall continue to be imported at the present rate of duty. 
The gentleman has contended, that the additional duty of five 
cents per gallon upon molasses will operate with severity upon 
the poor, who use this article with their food. Can this position 
be sustained? If all protection to agriculture were out of the 
question, and if we were now debating a mere measure of revenue, 
the duty ought to be increased to ten cents. It would require a 
much greater increase of duty, than the bill proposes, to place the 
poor man of New England, where this article is chiefly consumed. 



356 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

upon the same footing with the poor man in other portions of the 
Union. One gallon of molasses contains sweetening matter equal 
to eight pounds of brown sugar. Under the existing laws, the 
poor man of Pennsylvania, who purchases eight pounds of such 
sugar, pays a duty upon it of twenty-four cents, whilst the indi- 
vidual who buys a gallon of molasses, pays only a duty of five 
cents. At present, the poor man in one portion of our country, 
thus pays nearly five times as much duty, upon an article of the 
same nature, as the poor man in another. I ask the gentleman to 
answer this argument. After the duty on molasses shall have 
been increased to ten cents, there will still be a great disproportion 
between the tax upon it and upon brown sugar. Those who use 
molasses in the eastern States, will not, even then, pay half as 
much tax to the Government, as the consumers of brown sugar 
in the other portions of the Union. It has been estimated by a 
gentleman from Vermont, [Mr. Hunt,] that each individual in 
that State, consumes, upon an average, about two gallons of 
molasses in the course of a year. Admitting this estimate to be 
correct, by the law now in existence, he pays a duty of ten cents ; 
and will, if this bill should pass, pay only twenty cents; whilst 
another individual in Pennsylvania, who has not acquired the taste 
for molasses, will still be compelled to pay forty-eight cents, upon 
sixteen pounds of brown sugar. 

I have the highest names in the country to sustain me in this 
part of the argument. I have already referred to the former 
Speaker of this House. Let me now introduce the name of Mr. 
Madison for the same purpose. He proposed a duty of eight 
cents a gallon on molasses, in the first Congress, when only five 
per cent, ad valorem was imposed upon most of the articles 
imported from abroad. It will be observed by the committee that 
this duty was proposed at the same time that it was agreed to tax 
brown sugar only one cent per pound. Mr. Madison, in support 
of his motion, said, " he had heard an observation made by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. Fitzsimmons.] which he 
thought lessened the force of the objection taken against taxing 
molasses as a necessary of life, those who used it in substance 
escaped the tax on sugar, at least so much of it as the one was a 
substitute for the other ; he feared that there was no other way of 
coming at the duty on country rum, but laying one on the ma- 
terial from which it was extracted; and he did not think eight 
cents out of the way." Mr. Fitzsimmons, then a representative 
from Pennsylvania, and an able and practical representative he 



1828] SPEECH ON TARIFF BILL 357 

was, so far as I can judge from the debates of that day, in sus- 
taining the proposition of Mr. Madison, observed, " as to what 
is used in its raw, unmanufactured state, it will be sufficient to 
observe, that, as it is generally a substitute for sugar, the con- 
sumers will therefore avoid the tax on that article, and pay it on 
the other. In Pennsylvania they mostly use sugar; now, if the 
people there pay a tax upon that article, it is but distributive 
justice that the people of Massachusetts pay one on the article 
they use for the same purpose." And again, he contended, 
" if a less, or much less, duty be laid, the operation of the tax 
upon sugar and molasses would be unequal on the consumer, 
which certainly cannot be the wish of any member, if I may judge 
from the conciliating disposition which is prevalent in the com- 
mittee." Finally the Committee of the Whole determined to 
impose a duty of six cents per gallon upon molasses. 

When it was afterwards proposed to fix the duty on brown 
sugar at two cents per pound, Mr. Fitzsimmons remarked, " that 
one gallon of molasses weighed eight pounds; that at six cents 
it did not pay a cent per pound ; could it therefore be called any 
wise equal to such a tax on sugar? Moreover, sugar is an article 
of as general consumption as molasses; and when it is of this 
inferior quality, it enters as much, or more, into the consumption 
of the poor, as the other, while at the same time molasses will 
sweeten more according to its weight, than even the best sugar 
will; from which considerations I think gentlemen will be satis- 
fied, by putting it on an equality with molasses ; therefore. I do 
not oppose one cent per pound." The committee accordingly 
fixed the duty at one cent. 

A duty of six cents upon each gallon of molasses, even at 
that day of low duties, passed the Committee of the Whole of 
the House of Representatives, although it was opposed, upon the 
floor, by all the intellectual strength of New England, then in that 
body. This duty was afterwards reduced (I believe in the Sen- 
ate,) to two and a half cents per gallon; and in that form the law 
passed. Thus the Eastern people— by means of that perseverance 
of character which so eminently distingiu'shes them, and which no 
man more admires than I do myself— succeeded in defeating a 
majority of the House of Representatives, with Mr. Madison at 
their head. Whilst the duty imposed upon brown sugar was one 
cent per pound, that imposed upon a gallon of molasses, which 
is equal to eight pounds of sugar, was only two and a half cents. 
In the history of our legislation, this original disparity has become 



358 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

much greater. Whilst brown sugar now pays three cents per 
pound, molasses is charged with only five cents per gallon. And 
yet a printed paper, under the signature of "Many," entitled "The 
Real State of the Case," has been circulated from this House over 
the Union, accusing the Committee on Manufactures of intro- 
ducing the moderate additional duty of five cents per gallon 
upon molasses, into the bill, for the purpose of destroying it. In 
this manner they have been presented before the public as objects 
for the hand of scorn to point at — as betrayers of that interest 
which it was their duty to protect. 

The gentleman from Maine seems to be ignorant of the nature 
of distilling grain ; at least so far as it is practiced in the district 
which I have the honor in part to represent. He spoke of the 
farmer going to the distiller with 50 bushels of corn, and giving 
one half of the spirits which it produced, and which he estimated 
at fifty gallons, for distilling the other half. In my district they 
have attained to great perfection in the art of distillation. I have 
at this moment in my pocket a letter from a respectable distiller of 
the county of Chester, which informs me that he makes three 
gallons of whiskey from a single bushel of grain — the one half 
corn and the other half rye. I believe this to be no uncommon 
production. The distiller receives little more for his labor than 
food for his hogs. It is by feeding stock, and not by distillation, 
that he makes his profit. For even,' cent which you increase the 
price of a gallon of whiskey, the distiller is able to give the farmer 
an increased price of nearly three cents for his bushel of grain. 
Raise the price of whiskey but five cents the gallon, and you 
increase the price of corn and rye from twelve to fifteen cents 
the bushel. This, therefore, is a vast interest. It is not on ac- 
count of the distillers that we are anxious ; although their interests 
ought not to be disregarded. We wish to afford the farmer a 
home market for his grain. I do not wish to see the consumption 
of spirits increased a single gallon. Heaven forbid that I should ! 
What I alone desire, and what alone I wish to obtain, is, that 
spirits distilled from native grain should be substituted, instead 
of spirits distilled from foreign materials. If this article must 
be used, let it be that of domestic origin. 

The gentleman has depicted, in glowing colors, other dis- 
astrous consequences which would inevitably follow, from the 
proposed increase of duty on molasses. This five cents per gal- 
lon will destroy our lumber trade, and our fish trade, with the 
West Indies. He says they both depend upon molasses, because 



1828] SPEECH ON TARIFF BILL 



359 



that is the article which we received in exchange for our fish 
and our lumber, and that should the present bill pass we shall no 
longer be able to trade our lumber and our fish with the peojjle 
of the West Indies, for their molasses. The fertile imagination 
of the gentleman has given birth to other alarming consequences, 
which would follow from this extravagant duty. It will not only 
destroy the lumber trade and the fisheries, but their destruction 
will destroy the navy. Even my friend from Maine [Mr. 
Anderson,] drew the same hideous picture. 

It is very fortunate that the British did not know what was 
our true condition during the last war. If the five cents per 
gallon will be productive of such fearful consequences, the British 
government, by withholding molasses from us altogether, might 
have prostrated our navy. Before the gentleman made this dis- 
covery to the House, he should have moved to close the doors. 
We are surrounded by British agents, and no doubt this discovery 
will be sent across the Atlantic, with the rapidity of an eagle's 
flight. Five cents per gallon of additional duty upon molasses, 
will destroy our timber trade, our fisheries, our commerce, our 
navigation, nay, even our navy. I might alter his quotation, and 
say, " not a flag but by molasses sails." It is the article which 
keeps the star-spangled banner of our country afloat upon the 
ocean. Is the gentleman serious in exhibiting to our \'\ew all 
" the gorgons and chimeras " which he has called into his 



service ? 



For my own part, I fear that we shall derive but little benefit 
from this duty on molasses. It is too small to produce any great 
practical good. It will increase the price of New England rum. 
in a degree so trifling, that I fear it will not very much diminish 
its consumption. 

I know that those who have acquired a taste for molasses will 
not abandon the use of that article, even if it should cost five cents 
per gallon more than the present price. I do not apprehend that 
any of the great interests of the country is about to be seriously 
afifected, much less destroyed, by this tax. 

The gentleman from Maine, in his concluding observations, 
remarked, if I understood him correctly, and if I did not I wish 
to afiford him an opportunity to explain, that the British Parlia- 
ment would pass this bill by acclamation, if presented to them. 
And that, if the members of the committee had been British sub- 
jects, they could not have pleased their royal master better, than 
by presenting him with this production. . 



360 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

Mr. Sprague here explained. 

Sir, said Mr. B. I am pleased to take the gentleman's expla- 
nation. More especially as he has disclaimed all intention to 
attribute any improper motive to the committee. 

I shall not, after this explanation, make the remarks which 
I intended ; but shall conclude, with a few observations in relation 
to the general course which has been pursued towards the Com- 
mittee on Manufactures, by those who are opposed to the bill. 
This committee is one of our Standing Committees. The mem- 
bers who compose it, both in head and in heart, will bear a fair 
comparison with those of any other committee of this House. 
They have been most industriously employed, and no gentleman 
upon this floor ought either to think or to say that they have 
abandoned their duty. In my opinion, it would have been much 
more proper that no remarks, such as those which were made by 
the gentleman from Maine, should have been uttered upon this 
floor. What is the necessary inference from such observations? 
Either that the committee misunderstood, or betrayed the interest 
which had been intrusted to their care. Either that they were 
weak, or that they were wicked. No gentleman upon this floor 
has a right to present any committee before this House, or before 
the nation, in such an attitude. Another gentleman from New 
York [Mr, Martindale,] has said, in the progress of the debate, 
that, if they had been bribed with British gold, they could not 
more effectually have injured their own country, than by the bill 
which they have reported. I have no disposition to fight the bat- 
tles of the committee. Being a man of peace, I am scarcely 
willing to fight my own ; but yet I feel myself constrained publicly 
to declare, that, in my opinion, the conduct which has been pur- 
sued towards that committee has been highly reprehensible. It is 
the common duty of every member of this House, to protect the 
character of all other members from unmerited censure. We 
should at least exercise mutual tenderness towards each other ; as 
we are all certain of being sufficiently abused by the public. We 
are often placed in such situations, that our judgment is at war 
with our feelings. If, under these circumstances, in addition to 
the performance of an unpleasant duty, our motives are to be 
branded with suspicion by each other, our situation must soon 
become exceedingly irksome. I have been led to this remark, 
from having felt myself compelled, this day, to vote against the 
bill for the relief of the widow of General Brown. It was the 
most reluctant vote which I have ever given. I am sorry that any 



1828] DUTIES ON DISTILLED SPIRITS S61 

improper motive should ever, either directly or indirectly, have 
been attributed to the Committee of Manufactures. The policy of 
measures, not the motives of the members of the committee who 
recommend them, is the fair subject of attack upon this floor. 
The best apology which I can make to the House for having 
trespassed so long upon their attention, is to sit down, without 
making any formal conclusion. 



REMARKS, APRIL 8, 1828, 

ON THE DUTY ON DISTILLED SPIRITS.' 

Mr. Buchanan (on whose motion this amendment had been 
adopted in Committee of the Whole) replied to Mr. Barney, and 
strenuously advocated it.^ 

Mr. Buchanan now said, that so many members had ex- 
pressed to him a desire that he would propose a lower duty, that 
he was induced, for the sake of harmony, and to save the time of 
the House, and not because he thought the duty too high, to move 
to amend the amendment by striking out thirty, and inserting 
twenty. 

The Chair reminded him that such a motion would not be 
in order, in as much as the amendment of the Committee of the 
Whole which went to strike out ten, and insert thirty, was not 
divisible. He might, however, attain his object by having a 
vote first taken on thirty cents, and, if that should be decided 
in the negative, his motion for twenty would then be in order. 

The question was accordingly put on concurring in the 
amount reported by the Committee of the Whole, viz : to strike 
out ten cents, and insert thirty, and decided in the negative, by 
yeas and nays: — Yeas, 58 — Nays 131. 

Mr. Buchanan now moved to strike out ten cents and insert 
twenty; and this question was also decided in the negative, by 
yeas and nays: — Yeas, 90 — Nays 102. 

Mr. Buchanan, expressing reluctance again to trouble the 
House, but referring to the importance of this subject to his 
constituents, moved to strike out ten cents and insert fifteen. 



'Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part 2, 2219, 2221. 
' The amendment was to substitute thirty cents for ten cents as the duty 
on distilled spirits. 



362 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

Mr. Degraff requested Mr. Buchanan to state to the House 
what was the present duty on imported spirits. This Mr. 
Buchanan decHned, as he presumed the gentlemen were all ac- 
quainted with it. 



AMENDMENT, APRIL 9, 1828, 

OF THE DUTIES ON WOOLLENS. i 

Mr. Buchanan moved the following amendment to that just 

offered by Mr. Mallary: 

Strike out after the word "bindings," in the 2nd paragraph, and insert: 
Instead of the present duty of 33 1-3 per cent, ad valorem, a duty of 40 
per cent, ad valorem, until the 30th day of June, 1829, and after that time, 
a duty of 5 per cent, per annum, in addition, until the whole amount of duty 
shall be 50 per cent, ad valorem : Provided, That all manufactures of wool, 
except flannels and baizes, the actual value of which, at the place whence 
imported, shall not exceed 33 1-3 cents per square yard, shall, instead of the 
present duty of 25 per cent, ad valorem, be charged with a duty of 30 per 
cent, ad valorem, until the 30th day of June, 1829, and, after that time, a 
duty of 5 per cent, per annum, in addition, until the whole amount of duty 
shall be 40 per cent, ad valorem. 

Mr. Buchanan advocated his amendment in a short speech, 
stating his objection to the introduction of minimums, and his 
belief that this amendment would be equivalent, in its effects, to 
the minimum system, as reported in the bill. 



REMARKS, APRIL 15, 1828, 

ON THE DUTY ON MOLASSES. 2 

Mr. Buchanan professed to be a decided friend to the policy 
of protecting domestic industry, but his attachment to the bill 
would be greatly diminished if the duty on molasses should be 
stricken out. He contended that every three gallons of molasses, 
imported into this country, to be manufactured into New England 
rum, took the place of one bushel of corn or rye; and that, for 
each cent per gallon, which was added to the price of whiskey, the 
distillers in his district could, and did give an additional price, of 



'Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part 2, pp. 
2252-2253. 

" Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part 2, p. 2346. 



1828] IMPORTATION OF IRON 363 

between two and three cents per bushel for grain. He had voted 
to strike out the duty on molasses in 1824, to save the tariff bill, 
but should not do so asfain. 



REMARKS, APRIL 19, 1828, 

ON MR. BARBOUR'S EXPLANATION.' 

Mr. Buchanan said he was glad the gentleman from Virginia 
had made the explanation which he had done, to the House, and 
to the nation. Mr. B. said, I was then a member of the House, 
and heard, at the time, that the Speaker had been mistaken in 
the opinion which the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. 
Durfee] entertained in relation to the tariff. It cannot be denied, 
however, that an erroneous impression has prevailed, to a con- 
siderable extent, in Pennsylvania, in regard to this transaction. 
That impression will now be removed by the explanation of the 
gentleman ; as his high character for integrity will give a sanction 
to his statement, which will carry conviction to every mind. 



REMARKS, APRIL 28, 1828, 

ON A BILL TO AUTHORIZE RAILROAD COMPANIES TO IMPORT 
IRON AND MACHINERY FREE OF DUTY.2 

Mr. Buchanan said, he felt indifferent, whether the bill were 
referred to the Committee of Manufactures, or to the Committee 
of the Whole on the state of the Union. He would not have said 
a word upon this subject, had he not felt it to be his duty to notice 
the remarks made by his friends from Massachusetts and South 
Carolina [Mr. Dwight and Mr. McDuffie.] 

The gentleman from Massachusetts has stated, that this bill, 
should it become a law, would not interfere with the domestic 
production of iron; because we cannot manufacture such iron 



'Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part 2, p. 2414. 
These remarks refer to an explanation made by Mr. P. P. Barbour, of Vir- 
ginia, of his course, when Speaker of the House, in appointing the Commit- 
tee on Manufactures. AUhough personally opposed to the protective system, 
he had intended to appoint a majority favorable to protection, and had, as he 
supposed, done so; but he proved to be mistaken as to the views of Mr. 
Durfee, of Rhode Island, who, contrary to expectations, did not concur in 
the measures of those who were favorable to manufactures. 

' Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part 2, p. 2503. 



364 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

as the construction of Rail Roads requires. I believe that such 
iron can be manufactured, in this country to any extent which may 
be required ; and I trust that I will be able to demonstrate the cor- 
rectness of this opinion, when the proper occasion shall arrive. 

The gentleman from South Carolina has said, that this was 
a bill to encourage internal improvements. In this he is correct. 
He might have said more, and declared, that it went further in 
that cause, than any member of this House had ever yet proposed. 
We have subscribed stock in incorporated companies, to promote 
the construction of roads and canals ; but upon such subscriptions 
we have always expected to receive our dividends. This is all 
right. We have gone further, and constructed a turnpike road at 
the sole expense of the Government ; but this road was intended 
to be free to all the citizens of the United States, and no person 
now contemplates, that more toll shall ever be collected upon it, 
than may be necessary to keep it in repair. This bill goes to a 
much greater length than we have gone in either of these cases. 
It proposes nothing less, than to make an absolute donation of 
about $300,000 to a company, whose stock is selling at $16 for 
$1, or at sixteen hundred per cent, above par, upon the money 
which has been actually paid; from which the citizens of the 
United States will never receive any advantage, either in a 
diminution of the rate of tolls, or in dividends. I think this bill 
ought to be referred to the Committee of the Whole, and I hope 
that, in pursuing this course, we may be committing the lamb to 
the wolf — the event which the gentleman from South Carolina 
apprehended might result from its reference to the Committee of 
Domestic Manufactures. 



REMARKS, APRIL 30, 1828, 

ON THE DATE OF ADJOURNMENT.' 

Mr. Buchanan opposed fixing any day of adjournment at 
this time. It might be that Congress could adjourn on the 19th 
of May. This would depend much upon the time which the 
Senate might occupy in the discussion of the Tariff. He said, 
that, until that subject should be finally disposed of, he would not 
agree to fix upon any day ; because he would not give any vote 

' Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV.. part 2, pp. 2541- 
2542. 



1828] THE NATURALIZATION LAWS 365 

which might prevent a final decision upon the Tariff question, 
during the present session. 

He concurred in opinion with the gentleman from New York 
[Mr. Taylor.] The committee had been appointed for two pur- 
poses. The first was to ascertain and report to this House the 
bills upon which it w^s our duty to act during the present session ; 
and the second, to recommend a day of adjournment. In order 
to ascertain when we could adjourn, it was necessary that the 
Committee should first have determined what we ought yet to do. 
The one question was dependent upon the other. Notwithstand- 
ing this clear proposition, the committee have recommended, that 
the session shall be closed on the 26th of May; without having- 
considered what time, whether a longer or a shorter period, the 
transaction of the public business might require. 

Mr. B. then renewed the motion of Mr. Taylor to lay the 
report upon the table. 

Mr. Isacks demanded that the question be taken by yeas and 
nays, and they were ordered by the House — and, being taken, they 
stood as follows : — Yeas "jj — Nays 90. 

So the House refused to lay the report on the table. 



REMARKS, MAY 1, 1828, 

ON THE NATURALIZATION LAWS.» 

Mr. Buchanan then moved the consideration of the bill " to 
amend the acts concerning Naturalization." 

Mr. B. said, he would briefly state the reasons which had 
induced the Judiciary Committee to report this bill to the House. 
Under the existing law, an alien cannot be naturalized unless he 
has resided for five years within the limits of the United States. 
He must, when he applies to be naturalized, prove his residence 
by disinterested testimony; his own oath is not allowed for this 
purpose. In addition, he must exhibit a certificate that he had 
declared, in a Court of Record, at least two years before his 
application, that it was his intention to become a citizen, and to 
renounce his allegiance to the Government from which he came. 
The bill will not interfere witli either of these provisions. The 
existing laws require, in addition to these provisions, that the 
alien should produce a certificate that he had gone before a 

^ Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part 2, pp. 2555" 
2556. 



366 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

Court of Record, and registered himself ; and this certificate is to 
be the evidence of the time of his arrival within the United States. 
The act of 22d March, 1816, farther requires that this certificate 
of registry shall be recited in the certificate of naturalization. 

What has been the consequence? By a correct construction 
of these laws, no alien can be naturalized without a registry. This 
is the only evidence which the court can legally receive of the 
time of his arrival. In those courts, therefore, in which this prac- 
tice prevails, if an alien has been ten years in the country, though 
his residence were notorious during all that time, still, if he has 
neglected to register himself, he cannot be naturalized until five 
years after his first application to the court. This neglect is com- 
mon, nay, almost universal ; because aliens do not know the law, 
and would not, for sometime after their arrival, conform to it, 
even if they did. But this law, like every other unreasonable one, 
is evaded. It sets up an arbitrary standard of evidence, to defeat 
the spirit of its own provisions. The consequence is, that some 
courts do, and others do not, carry this part of it into execution. 
In 1824, Congress yielded this provision, so far as to declare, that 
a certificate of naturalization theretofore obtained, should be good, 
notwithstanding it did not recite this registry. The Committee 
on the Judiciary believed that it would be better at once to dispense 
with this registry. They thought it would simplify the law. 

The second section provides for another class of cases. Every 
alien who has arrived in this country, since the 14th of April, 
1802, must exhibit a certificate of the declaration of his intention 
to become a citizen, made two years before his application to be 
naturalized. 

It was believed by the committee, that, if an alien could 
establish, by clear and indifferent testimony, that he had arrived 
in the country previous to the late war, (viz. the i8th June, 
181 2,) and continued to reside in it ever since, this condition 
might, in such case, with propriety, be dispensed with. We had 
reason to believe that there were many persons in the country, 
particularly Irishmen, who served as soldiers during the late war, 
who have hitherto neglected to make a declaration of their inten- 
tion to become citizens; and we thought it right to provide for 
this class of cases, more especially as such persons must prove, by 
clear and indifferent testimony, that they have ever since resided 
within the United States. It is now nearly sixteen years since 
the declaration of that war. This section is in strict accordance 
with former precedents. By the act of 14th April, 1802, aliens 



1828] OFFICE OF MAJOR GENERAL 



30-; 



resident within the United States between the 29th January, 
1795, and 1 8th June, 1798, might, within two years after its 
passage, have become citizens, without any such declaration of 
their intention. Here the residence required was not quite six 
years. By the act of the 26th March, 1804. ahens, who liave 
resided in the country between the i8th June, 1798, and the 14th 
April, 1802, and have continued to reside in it, have a right to be 
naturalized, without producing such a certificate. Since 1804. we 
have passed no similar provision, although more than twenty-four 
years have since elapsed. 



REMARKS, MAY 14, 1828, 

ON THE OFFICE OF MAJOR GENERAL.' 

Mr. Buchanan said, he should not have said a word upon this 
bill, had not his attention been drawn to the second section of it, 
by the motion of the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Vance.] He 
would have contented himself with a silent vote in favor of its 
passage. But, said Mr. B. I belong to the Militia myself — I 
have a fellow-feeling for them, and I never shall consent to de- 
grade them; for after all, they are the great bulwark of our 
defence. The second section of this bill will produce that effect. 
A Captain in the regular Army, after he has continued in the 
service for ten years, is breveted a Major, and in ten years more 
he becomes a Colonel by brevet. The mere lapse of twenty years 
transforms a Captain into a Colonel by brevet, and gives him this 
honorary rank ; although he may still remain but a Captain in the 
line, and be entitled to command but a single company. Brevet 
rank is therefore acquired, in our army, without any extraordinary 
merit. Under this section, such a Captain would be entitled to 
rank a Colonel of Volunteers or Militia who had led his regiment 
into the field, and to assume the command. I ask, will not any 
law, which would operate in this manner, tend to destroy the 
spirit of the Militia, and to degrade them both in their own eyes 
and those of the Nation ? The past history of this country proves 
that they do not deserve such treatment at our hands. During the 
last war, the Militia purchased glory both for themselves and for 
their country, upon the field of battle; and our most brilliant vic- 



' Register of Debates, 20 Cong, i Sess. 1827-1828, IV., part 2. pp. 2679- 
2680, 2684-2685. 



368 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

tories were those achieved under the command of men, who had 
been MiHtia Generals, and who were transferred to the same rank, 
in the regular Army. 

It has been objected, against the passage of this bill, by the 
gentleman from South Carolina, [Mr. Drayton,] that if the office 
of Major General should be abolished, a Militia Major General 
would then command an officer of the highest rank in our Army, 
should regular troops and militia be called into service together. 
Even if we should admit this construction of the law to be correct, 
the inconvenience which that gentleman apprehends, would never 
occur in point of fact. The army is now on a peace establish- 
ment. When war shall threaten us, it must immediately be reor- 
ganized. We must then call into existence a new head to the 
Army, and confer upon him a rank which will entitle him to com- 
mand a Major General of Militia. It is scarcely possible, there- 
fore, that the case supposed by the gentleman can ever exist. 

If this bill should pass, it will afford the President of the 
United States an opportunity of placing at the head of the Army, 
in the event of war, an able and an efficient man, and relieve the 
country from the danger of having that station pre-occupied by 
a superannuated officer. In the mean time, no inconvenience can 
be experienced. The President is Commander-in-Chief of the 
Army ; and it is his duty to decide the question of rank, which has 
so long existed, between the two Brigadier Generals. The one 
or the other of them will then be the chief officer of the Army. 
But it was not my intention to discuss the main question ; I rose 
merely to defend the Militia, and I shall proceed no further. 

********** 

Mr. Buchanan said, he felt himself bound to reply to some 
of the remarks of the gentleman from South Carolina, [Mr. Mc- 
Duffie.] That gentleman has been pleased to say that I had 
made a grand discovery when I found out that the army of the 
United States ought to be left without a head in time of peace. 
He has also endeavored to prove that the principles which I 
advocated would result in abolishing all the officers in the army. 
Indeed, from the tenor of his observations, it might be supposed 
that I had expressed a desire to destroy the whole military estab- 
lishment of the country — horse, foot, and dragoons. 

That gentleman has not only done me injustice in the manner 
he has stated the proposition which I advocated, but he has drawn 
the most unnatural and the most illogical inferences from my 
argument. 



1828] OFFICE OF MAJOR GENERAL 369 

It is well known that, up to the rank of Colonel, the officers 
have a right to be regularly promoted. Beyond that rank, no such 
right exists. At that point regular promotions, according to 
seniority, cease. Within this limit, I trust I should be one of the 
last men in this House who would attempt to interfere. I shall 
ever hold all existing rights of the officers sacred. But what is 
the case above the rank of Colonel? It has been the uniform 
practice of this government to leave the discretion of the Presi- 
dent unfettered, and to allow him to select general officers from 
the mass of the American people. Why has this practice pre- 
vailed ? Is it not to enable the President to select such men to fill 
the high offices of the army as may be best able to serve their 
country? Our present army is emphatically a peace establish- 
ment. Its present organization never was intended for a state 
of war. I wish, therefore to leave every avenue open, which I 
can do with a proper regard to the existing state of things, for the 
purpose of enabling the President, in the day of danger, to fill the 
high offices of the army with efficient commanders. xA.nd yet the 
gentleman from S. Carolina has contended that my argument, 
which was specially confined to the office of Major General, would 
equally apply to officers of every grade, and lead to the destruction 
of the whole army. 

The case of General Brown will strikingly illustrate the truth 
of the proposition for which I contended. He was a great mili- 
tary man. Nature had made him a commander. He commenced 
his career in the militia, and then was appointed a General in the 
service of the United States. During the last war, he not only 
distinguished himself, but he distinguished his country. But I 
would ask the gentleman from South Carolina, whether General 
Brown, for years before his death, would have been fit to take 
the command of the army, and go into active service? Time and 
disease had laid their heavy hands upon him, and had rendered 
him wholly unable to take the field against an enemy. In con- 
sidering this subject, we should never forget that the present army 
is emphatically upon a peace establishment; and that, by alxilish- 
ing the office of Major General, when danger shall threaten, and 
when it becomes necessary to organize our military estal)lishnient 
for a state of war, the field of competition for the highest office in 
it will be left entirely open. The President may then select the 
most capable man in the country for that arduous station, whether 
he be found in the militia, the regular army, or among the 
private citizens of our country. It is certain he ought to l)c an 

24 



370 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

efficient man, capable of rendering his country service, and not 
a superannuated officer. 

In order to accomplish this purpose, however, I would not 
disturb any man living. I would not think of abolishing the 
office, either of Scott or of Gaines, even if they were less worthy 
of their country's gratitude, although I do not believe both to be 
necessary. But when either of them shall die or shall resign. 
Congress ought, in my opinion, to act upon the same principle, 
and leave but a single Brigadier General at the head of the army. 

I have thought it necessary to say thus much, to redeem 
myself from the remarks of the gentleman from South Carolina. 
I thought it due to myself, considering the respectable source 
from which they came, not to suffer them to go before the public 
unanswered. I should think the saving of money to the Treasury 
an inconsiderable object, though it ought to be altogether disre- 
garded, provided the services of a Major General were required 
by the army. I shall not reply to the other observations of the 
gentleman. That task has already been performed by the gentle- 
man from Virginia, [Mr. Smyth,] in a much better manner than 
it could have been accomplished by me. 



ADDRESS, JUNE, 1828, 
on the establishment of common schools.^ 

Friends and Fellow-Citizens. 

The spectacle which I now behold, recalls strongly to my 
memory the days of other years. The scene now before me, pre- 
sents nearly the same appearance that it did, nineteen years ago, 
when a graduate of Dickinson College, with trembling anxiety, 
I first addressed a public audience. But although the appear- 
ance is the same, how changed is the reality! Since then, the 
silent but mighty current of time, which is continually sweeping 
away the successive generations of men, has driven many of my 
collegiate friends & companions upon that peaceful shore, 
where " the wicked cease from troubling & the weary are at 
rest." The pencil of fancy cannot paint, — the heart alone can 
feel, the melancholy pleasure, which that man enjoys, who for 
a long period of years, has been buffeting the storms of life, when 
in the hour of calm reflection, he looks back upon the literary 



^Buchanan Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania. This address, 
the manuscript of which is in Buchanan's own handwriting, was apparently 
delivered at Dickinson College in June, 1828. 



18^^8] COMMON SCHOOLS .HI 

solitude, the tranquillit}^— and the comparative happiness of his 
cohegiate years. Such have been my feehngs, upon revisiting 
my alma mater. 

Since I ceased to be under her protection, I have been an 
anxious spectator of the vicissitudes of her fortune. I liave 
rejoiced in her prosperity & mourned over her adversity: and 
I am happy now to be able to congratulate the numerous friends 
of Dickinson College throughout the country, upon the high 
character which she has so justly acquired. Long may she con- 
tinue to be the seat of piety, of learning. & of extensive use- 
fulness ! 

It is my intention, upon the present occasion, to address you 
upon the peculiar importance of universal education, under our 
form of government; — & to urge the necessity & propriety 
of establishing primary or common schools by law, throughout 
the State of Pennsylvania. I shall not dwell upon the advantages 
of classical learning, — of that education which is necessary 
to form great statesmen, great philosophers, or great divines. 
This subject has been so often discussed, that everv argument 
has already been exhausted, — every flower has alreadv been 
culled. To dispute the advantages of a classical education, m 
the nineteenth century, would be an act of barbarism, at war 
with the genius of the present age, & suited only to the igno- 
rance, the superstition & the despotism of ages whicli have long 
since fled. 

My present purpose is, to advocate that system of common 
education, which like the light of heaven, extends its advantages 
to all ; & which will tend to make every citizen of this vast 
Republic wiser & better, — more sensible of the blessings of civil 
& religious liberty which he enjoys, & more firm & determined 
in defending them, against every attack. 

The history of the world, until the American revolution, pre- 
sented a melancholy spectacle. Since the days of Nimrod, the 
mighty hunter whose prey was man, & who established the 
first empire over his fellow men, a war has been waged, between 
the lust of dominion, & the love of liberty,— between power 
& right, — between the few & the many, — the rulers & the ruled. 
In this contest, the rights of the people have been almost 
uniformly sacrificed, upon the altar of ambition & power. A\- 
though the sun of liberty had, occasionally & at long inter- 
vals,'' arisen, & beamed upon small & detached portions of 
our globe; yet, after a short period, it had been uniformly 



372 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

obscured, until at length it arose upon our favored land, I trust 
never to set. The hopes of the human race rest upon the grand 
experiment, which we are now making. Is man fit for self 
government? Our history must decide this all-important ques- 
tion. Upon our success depends the liberty of millions yet un- 
born, in all future generations. The empire of superstition & 
of despotism is now tottering throughout the civilized world. 
Whether it shall finally fall will depend upon the virtue & the 
wisdom of the American people. We are, at this day, the only 
people upon earth, in the enjoyment of rational liberty. That 
dawn which promised so fair & so bright a day, upon the 
Southern portion of our Continent, has been over-clouded. South 
America is, & forever will be, free from the dominion of 
Spain : — but whether the present generation, who have been edu- 
cated under a severe & jealous despotism, be capable of self 
government, is a question which yet remains to be decided. 

Our forefathers fled from the old world to the wilds of 
America, to escape from religious persecution, & to enjoy the 
liberty of worshipping their God, according to the dictates of their 
own conscience. These pilgrims caught a spark of civil liberty, 
from the altar of their religion, which they continued to cherish, 
until at length it burst forth in the flame of the American Revo- 
lution. We became independent; and we have established the 
most perfect, but at the same time, the most complicated form 
of Government which the world ever witnessed. We have re- 
duced into successful practice, that which had been considered 
impracticable, an imperium in imperio. We have constituted 
a General Government, to manage the common interests of the 
whole American people; whilst we have established twenty four 
State Sovereignties, to take care of the individual or separate 
interests of the people, within their respective territorial juris- 
dictions. The attraction of the General Government, ought to 
be no greater than is sufficient to preserve the States, within 
their proper orbits. Should the day ever arrive, when its in- 
fluence shall become so powerful, as to draw the States within 
its vortex, & to consolidate them with itself, the glory of our 
Republic will then be at an end. We may then exclaim, with the 

pious y^neas : 

" Fuimus Troes, fuit Ilium, et ingens 
Gloria Teucrorum." 

On the other hand, disunion is equally to be dreaded with 
consolidation. The freedom & the happiness of the American 



1828] COMMON SCHOOLS 373 

people are equally at war with both. Should the tendency 
towards disunion, become too powerful to be controlled by the 
federal Government, then the States 

" will run lawless through the void, 
Destroying others, by themselves destroyed." 

In medio tutissimus ibis. 

This complex Government, in all its various branches, 
springs from the people, & must be sustained by the people. 
Each elector in this country is a sovereign, in the strictest sense 
of the word. He is answerable to no tribunal, but that of God 
& his own conscience, for his exercise of the right of suffrage. 
This nicely balanced machine, therefore, can only be kept in 
regular motion, — the relative rights of the union and of the 
States can only be preserved inviolate by an enlightened & 
intelligent people. Education lies at the very root of all our 
Institutions, — it is the foundation upon which alone, they can 
repose in safety. Shall the people be educated, is a question not 
of mere policy ; but it is a question of life & death, upon which 
the existence of our present form of Government depends. 

Intelligence among the people has now become still more 
necessary, than it has ever been, since the adoption of the Federal 
constitution. Our Government has hitherto been kept in pros- 
perous motion, by the heroes & the statesmen of the revolution. 
The influence of their opinion has had a most powerful effect in 
directing & controlling the public will. Most of them are now 
sleeping with their fathers, and those who remain with us are 
but the feeble relicks of another age. There is now no man, nor 
no set of men in this country, either would or ought to have a 
commanding influence over their countrymen. Our political 
fathers, — the founders of the Republic are gone, & under Provi- 
dence, we must now depend upon ourselves. 

It is scarcely necessary to observe, before this enlightened 
audience, that it would be at war with the vital principle of our 
Republic, to confine education to any particular class. Where 
there is universal suffrage, there ought to be universal education. 
These are the main pillars, upon which our temple of liberty rests. 
In the language of the declaration of independence, " all men 
are born equal." Distinctions of rank, & a monied aristocracy 
may be necessary to sustain a throne; but they would be death 
to a Republic. Patriotism is a hardy virtue which flourishes with 
as much vigor in the soil of poverty, as that of afiluence. The 



374 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

man who has but Httle wealth to love, will love his country, & 
his privileges as a freeman, with the greater ardor. Add intelli- 
gence to the patriotism of such men, and you will constitute the 
best citizens of a free state. 

As, then, we value our inestimable rights & privileges : — 
as we value the perpetuity of our happy form of Government 
which has protected our lives, our liberty & our property, & 
has enabled each one of us to repose in security under our own 
vine & our own fig tree & there has been none to make us 
afraid : — as we value our religious liberty & the privilege of 
worshipping our God, according to the dictates of our own con- 
science, in a land where there is little bigotry, because there has 
been no persecution, & where sects which have been hostile 
in other countries, can live together in harmony, feeling no other 
emulation, but which shall be the most pious, the most useful. 
& the most devotedly attached to their common country: — 
As we value all these precious privileges, let us unite, heart & 
hand, each one in his sphere, & never cease to exert ourselves, 
ilntil the benefits of a common education shall be conferred upon 
every citizen of this great & extensive Commonwealth. 

The next question which demands our consideration, is, 
ought common schools to be established by law, for the educa- 
tion [of] the people? To answer this question will be but an 
easy task. The history of the world has established the truth of 
the position, that there is no other effectual method of imparting 
education to all; but by means of public schools. This system 
is not an untried experiment. It has long been in successful 
operation in the States of New England, & in New York; & 
their experience is conclusive, that it will answer the purpose for 
which it is intended. In establishing it, then, we shall not have to 
grope our way in the dark ; but we shall be guided by the lights 
of experience. The expense of the system has not been found 
oppressive even among the cold & barren hills of New England : 
shall it then be dreaded by those whose lot has been cast, amidst 
the rich & fertile valleys of Pennsylvania? The system is very 
simple. It proposes to divide our -counties into convenient school 
Districts, & to tax the inhabitants of each District, in propor- 
tion to their taxable property, for the maintenance of a common 
or primary school, for the education of all the children within 
its boundaries. Our laws have already provided the officers 
necessary to assess & collect this tax, — & the tax-gatherer might 
receive it from the people, at the same time that he collects the 



1828] COMMON SCHOOLS 375 

county rates & levies. It is not my purpose, however, to go into 
detail. 

Without urging any further the argument derived from the 
experience of our sister States, let us inquire whether it is not 
our duty to follow their example. The great Spartan law giver 
resolved " the whole business of legislation into the bringing 
up of youth." In his opinion the chief duty of a state was to 
provide for the education of its citizens. To prove that v/e 
ought to establish common schools, it would only be necessary to 
ask two plain & simple questions. Is it not the duty of our Gov- 
ernment to provide for its own preservation ? Are we not bound 
to transmit the liberty which we have inherited from our fathers 
unimpaired to our posterity. If these be solemn duties which 
we owe to our God, and to our country; they can be performed 
effectually, in no other manner, than by teaching our children 
to know & to prize their rights. An ignorant people, no matter 
how virtuous they may be, are easily misled. Besides vice is the 
natural companion of ignorance, whilst virtue loves to dwell with 
knowledge. Although poets have presented to us the most 
glowing pictures of the innocence & simplicity of man in a 
state of nature; although they have described that state as the 
golden age of the human race: — yet history & experience 
have taught us, that these are but the dreams of fancy, & that 
man, in his savage state, is selfish & cruel — & that his heart 
burns with fierce & ungovernable passions. Education is as 
necessary to correct his heart, as to inform his understanding. 
Virtue & knowledge must unite & exert their joint influence 
over the American people; or our Republic must fall a prey to 
some factious demagogue, or some military usurper. And shall 
not our Legislation provide for that education which is essential 
to the existence of our Government: — a Government, which not 
only secures our own safety & happiness; but which has been 
elevated on high, & become the beacon light of liberty, to cheer 
the wise & the good throughout the nations, & teach them to hope, 
even amid the gloom of despotism. 

To a Being of superior intelligence, what a strange spectacle 
would our Commonwealth present! Whilst we are straining 
every nerve to improve the State ; — whilst our Government is ex- 
pending vast sums to draw forth all its physical resources, the 
very beings themselves, for whose advantage these great works 
have been undertaken, are neglected. In our different counties, 
we cheerfully submit to be taxed for the erection of bridges, for 



376 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

making & keeping our public roads in repair, & for many other 
purposes. Shall we, then, not agree to be taxed, for the pur- 
pose of cultivating the minds of our children, & teaching them 
to be wise, to be virtuous, & to be pious? Shall we consent to 
contribute for the improvement of every thing, except ourselves? 

The establishment of common schools would elevate the 
character of our schoolmasters, who next to the clergy, occupy 
the most important station in society. Next to the influence 
of the mother, that of the schoolmaster is felt throughout life. 
And here it may be proper to inquire, what ought to be the quali- 
fications of an instructor of youth? He should command the 
respect, & the veneration of the pupils committed to his charge. 
He should understand the human character, & know when to be 
severe, & when to be merciful, — when to display the terrors of 
authority, & when to draw the youthful mind by the cords of 
affection. Before he attempts to instruct others, he ought him- 
self to be instructed. What is the state of the case under the 
existing system? The occupation of a country schoolmaster is 
one to which but few men resort, who are capable of discharging 
its all-important duties. When such men resort to that employ- 
ment, it is from necessity, not from choice. All are willing to 
abandon it, whenever they have an opportunity of embarking 
in any other business. The consequence is, that at most schools, 
there is a rapid succession of incompetent schoolmasters, who 
teach children nothing correctly. Instead of acquiring a taste 
for knowledge, which would accompany them through life, they 
become disgusted with the unmeaning jargon which they have 
been taught at school, & ever after feel an aversion to the 
pursuit of knowledge. Indeed, such is now the situation of our 
schools throughout the State, that in many instances, parents 
feel themselves obliged to send their children abroad to receive a 
common English education ; and thus, in one year, incur a heavier 
expense, than their proportion of the tax necessary to support a 
common school would amount to, in an ordinary life time. 

The establishment of common schools would be a remedy 
for all these evils. It would elevate the schoolmaster to that rank 
in society, to which he is justly entitled. It would call into 
that profession men of worth & capacity, who would undertake 
the education of youth, not as a mere expedient, but as a per- 
manent employment. It would place sncli men above the caprice 
or injustice of individuals, by affording them a competent & 
fixed salary. They would then depend not upon the will of the 



1828] COMMON SCHOOLS 377 

few ; but upon that of a majority of the people, within their re- 
spective school Districts. 

Such common schools would collect together all the children 
of the District, upon terms of perfect equality. Each child, born 
within the State, would then have the same right to be educated 
by his country, that he now has to breathe its air, or to enjoy 
its sunshine. The odious distinction which at present exists, 
between poor scholars whose parents are unable to pay for their 
education, & the other children of the school, would exist no 
longer. That feeling of independence, which is the germ of every 
great quality & every Republican virtue, would no longer be 
blunted in the children of the poor, by the conscious feeling, that 
they depended upon charity for their education. They would 
no longer be pointed at by the other scholars, as objects of pitv 
or contempt. All the pupils at a public school would meet upon 
a perfect level, & among them, merit would be, as it ought to be, 
the only distinction. 

Genius is a plant which is as natural to the soil of poverty 
as that of affluence. It is a gift which Providence scatters Avith 
equal profusion among the children of the cottage, & the chil- 
dren of the palace. But without common schools, in what manner 
is the bud of genius in the offspring of the poor to be expanded ? 
Establish these schools, & then those gifted children, who 
possess extraordinary powers of mind, will have a field presented 
to them by their country, upon which to display their talents. 
This display will transplant them, from the common school to 
the College, & will procure for them an opportunity to exercise 
those powers for the benefit of mankind, which would otherwise 
have lain dormant, in the oblivion of poverty. The " village 
Hampdens, that with dauntless breast " would otherwise have 
only withstood "the little tyrant of their fields," will be called into 
the service of their country to defend its rights & its liberties. 
And the mute inglorious Miltons will elevate the character of the 
nation, by singing in the sweetest strains of Epic poetry. In our 
country, we shall no longer realize the complaint of the poet ; that 

" Full many a gem, of purest ray serene, 
The dark unfathom'd caves of ocean bear : 
Full many a flow'r is born to blush unseen. 
And waste its sweetness on the desert air." 

This system, by introducing among the people a general 
love of knowledge, would not only be a rich source of individual 
happiness, but a powerful preventive of vice & immorality. 



378 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

Who that can enjoy himself at home in the pursuit of knovvledg-e 
will ever be tempted to fly to the gambling table or to the tavern 
for amusement ? Such a man has a source of calm and rational 
enjoyment within himself, always at command, which will pre- 
serve him from those boisterous & sensual pleasures which prey 
both upon the body & upon the soul. No greater blessing can 
be conferred upon any people than to inspire them with a love 
of knowledge. Religion & virtue must follow in its train. 

It has been & it may be objected to this system that it is un- 
equal & unjust; because it imposes a tax upon property, without 
regarding whether the owners have many or few children to be 
educated, or even whether they have any. This objection is more 
specious than solid. Is it not just that the rich man should con- 
tribute towards this tax, as he now does to others, in proportion 
to the property which he has to protect ? Shall he pay cheerfully, 
in proportion to his wealth for the purpose of administering the 
Government; and yet refuse to be taxed in the same proportion 
to diffuse education among the people, upon which the very 
existence of the Government depends? 

But again. The rich man ought to remember that he may 
become poor; and that even should fortune continue to smile 
upon him, all his days, his posterity may be compelled to eat the 
bitter bread of poverty. There is no country upon the face of 
the earth, in which " riches so often take to themselves wings 
& fly away," as in our own. How many estates have been lost 
in our day, by a wild spirit of speculation ? How often have we 
witnessed the hard earnings of a life of avarice & toil, squandered 
in a few years by the profligacy of an heir? 

The division & subdivision of estates, under our laws, 
without any other cause, will of itself, in the course of a few 
generations cut up the largest estates into small fractions. The 
struggle for wealth which is forever carried on throughout this 
country is perpetually elevating the poor & depressing the rich. 
A wise man who looks through the vista of futurity & reflects 
upon the vicissitudes of human fortune, will calculate that 
although Providence, in his generation, may have caused his 
cup to overflow; yet that in future generations not remote, his 
posterity may be doomed to suffer the miseries of poverty. What 
more glorious legacy then can he leave his children than a pledge 
sanctified by the laws of his country, and which will endure as 
long as they shall endure, that his descendants shall receive a 
religious & virtuous education? That if he has, in his day, 



1828] COMMON SCHOOLS 379 

out of his abundance, paid a little more than his proportion of 
the tax to establish common schools, he has thereby secured to his 
posterity, whether they be in affluence or in poverty, the innumer- 
able blessings which flow from piety & knowledge. He casts 
his bread upon the waters, and if it should not return to bless 
him during his pilgrimage, it will assuredly return after many 
days to bless his posterity. 

Before I take my seat, I shall advert to another topic. I 
will apply the general argument in favor of Common Schools to 
the peculiar situation of Pennsylvania. If my voice could be 
heard throughout the Commonwealth, I would address her State 
pride & invoke its aid in the cause of common education. It 
would be enlisting a noble principle in defence of a good cause. 
When State pride is confined within proper limits, — when it is not 
jealous of a sister's fame ; but can admire excellence in her, even 
if she be a rival, it becomes the parent of many public virtues. 
It teaches us to love our native soil with more devotion, — it iden- 
tifies the feelings of the individual with those of his State, — it 
makes him glory in her prosperity & in her fame as though 
they were his own, and it stimulates us to a vigorous contest 
with our Sister States, for the palm of excellence. Shall Pennsyl- 
vania, then, look with cold indifference upon the system of com- 
mon Schools which is now established throughout New York 
& the New England States, and make no effort to communicate 
the same advantages to her own citizens ? Shall a common edu- 
cation be the birth right of every man who draws his first breath 
in New York or in Massachusetts, and shall the native citizen of 
Pennsylvania be doomed to ignorance by the neglect of his native 
State? Shall we patiently behold other States contending for 
that moral power in the union which must ever spring from 
knowledge, without making a single effort in the glorious cause 
of education ? I trust not. I hope for better things. 

Pennsylvania is destined to exert an influence over her 
Sister States superior to that of any other member of the Confed- 
eracy. Her position is in the centre of the Confederacy, and the 
character of her citizens eminently qualifies her to hold the 
balance steadily between the East & the West, — the North & 
the South. She is jealous of none of her sisters, — nor has she 
incurred the jealousy of any of them. Her stake in the preser- 
vation of the union is probably greater than that of any other 
State. Should the union ever be dissolved, which God forbid! 
she is destined to become the Flanders of America. Whilst it 



380 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1828 

shall continue, she must be prosperous, — she must act a distin- 
guished part among her sisters, either for good or for evil. She 
cannot, if she would, stand still. With what amazing force, 
then, does the language of the father of his Country apply to 
her! "In proportion as the structure of a government gives 
force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should 
be enlightened." The diffusion of education among her citizens 
may & probably will produce a lasting influence upon " ages 
unborn & nations yet behind." We owe it to ourselves & to 
our children, — we owe it to our Sister States, — we owe it to the 
world, to establish Common Schools for the education of a popu- 
lation which must exercise such an influence upon the preserva- 
tion of our glorious union & upon the destinies of mankind. 

Whilst advocating this system, I wish distinctly to be under- 
stood, that I would not have it forced upon the people against 
their will, by their Legislature. The best cause might be sacri- 
ficed by such an arbitrary exercise of power. But I would, if I 
could, convince the people of this Commonwealth of the vast 
importance of common Schools to them & to their children & 
I would persuade them to command their Representatives to 
enact a law for their establishment. 

In conclusion, T shall observe, that if the base passion of 
envy could ever be excused, a man ambitious of true glory might 
almost be justified, in envying the fame of that favored mortal, 
whoever he shall be, whom Providence intends to make the instru- 
ment in establishing common Schools throughout Pennsylvania. 
His fame will exceed that of the great Clinton, in the same pro- 
portion that mind is superior to matter. Whilst the one has 
erected a frail memorial which like every thing human, must in 
the course of ages deca}^ & perish ; the other will erect a monu- 
ment which shall flourish in immortal youth & endure whilst 
the soul of man shall continue to exist. 



REMARKS, DPXEMBER 11, 1828, 

ON THE EXTENSION OF THE TERM OF EXPORTATIONS WITH 
BENEFIT OF DRAWBACKS.' 

Mr. Buchanan said, it was his intention to vote in favor of 
the bill, and he wished, in a few words, to state his reasons. It is 
true, as the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Wickliffe] has stated. 



^ Register of Debates, 20 Cong. 2 Sess. 1828-1829, V. 98-99. 



1828] TERM OF EXPORTATIONS 381 

that the passage of this bill will diminish our annual revenue from 
$130,000 to $160,000. The question, then, is, will the object 
sought to be accomplished more than indemnify the country for 
this loss of revenue? He thought it would. The bill rests upon 
a very simple principle. Great Britain is struggling to obtain 
the carrying trade of the world. She has established free ports 
throughout her extensive dominions, in which her merchants may 
deposite foreign merchandise without the payment of any transit 
duty. The wise principle upon which she acts, is, to burthen her 
foreign trade as little as possible. It passes free through her 
dominions to foreign countries. 

The question, then, is, shall the American merchant be placed 
upon the same footing? Great Britain is our great rival for the 
carrying trade; and ought we not to enable our merchants to 
struggle against this powerful competition with the same ad- 
vantages which her merchants possess? Our laws impose a 
transit duty of two and a half per cent, upon the existing rate of 
duty, on all foreign merchandise imported into the United States, 
to he transported to foreign countries. This operates as a dis- 
criminating duty in favor of the English and against the Amer- 
ican merchant. All other circumstances being equal, it would, in 
effect, be a premium to that amount, to enable the foreign mer- 
chants to undersell our merchants in foreign markets. The 
simple question, then, is, shall we protect our foreign commerce 
by affording it the same advantages with the foreign commerce 
of Great Britain? 

At the last session of Congress, Mr. B. said, he had exerted 
all his feeble abilities to promote the passage of a law for the pro- 
tection of agriculture and manufactures. He considered com- 
merce equally entitled to our favor. Its protection was equally 
a part of the great American System. The duty which he felt 
he owed to the commerce and the mercantile interest of the coun- 
try, would not suffer him to vote against this bill. It was cal- 
culated to build up our foreign trade, and enable our merchants 
to enter into a fair competition with the merchants of the other 
commercial nations of the world. 

The yeas and nays were then taken, and stood as follow? : 
yeas 153, nays 28. 

So the bill was passed, and sent to the Senate. 



382 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

REMARKS, DECEMBER 23, 1828, 

ON THE BILL FOR THE OCCUPATION OF THE OREGON RIVER.' 

Mr. Buchanan was not unfriendly to the bill, but thought its 
language ought to be studied with great care, lest the nation 
should inadvertently compromit its own rights. He disliked that 
feature in the amendment which proposed a monopoly to one com- 
pany of forty miles square; and, believing that the subject re- 
quired more mature consideration, moved that the Committee rise, 
and it rose accordingly. 



1829. 
AMENDMENT, JANUARY 15, 1829, 

TO THE CUMBERLAND ROAD BILL.= 

Mr. Buchanan now entered the House, and wished to offer 
an amendment to the Cumberland road bill. 

The Chairman said that, as that bill had been laid aside, it 
would not be regular to receive the amendment. 

Mr. Buchanan insisted that, so long as the Committee re- 
mained in session, it was his right to offer an amendment to any 
of the bills it had had under consideration. 

The Chairman replied that the case was new to him, and he 
deemed such a course irregular, but should receive the amend- 
ment, if the Committee unanimously assented to it. 

Mr. Bassett now withdrew his motion for the rising of the 
committee, and no objections being made, Mr. Buchanan offered 
his amendment, which went to strike out the whole of the bill, 
after the enacting clause, with the exception of one hundred thou- 
sand dollars, to put the road in repair; and to provide, in sub- 
stance, that the several parts of the road passing through different 
States should be ceded to those States on certain conditions. Mr. 
B. after a few general observations on the great importance of 
the constitutional question involved in the bill, expressed his 
desire, that, owing to the feeble state of his health, the farther 
consideration of this bill might be postponed till Monday next; 
which being agreed to, the Committee rose, and reported the 
other bills to the House. 



^ Register of Debates, 20 Cong. 2 Sess. 1828-1829, V. 126. 
' Register of Debates, 20 Cong. 2 Sess. 1828-1829, V. 215. 



1829] SPEECH ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 383 

SPEECH, JANUARY 19, 1829, 

ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD.i 

The House then went into Committee of the Whole on the 
state of the Union. The Committee, on motion of Mr. Mercer, 
proceeded to consider the bill for the preservation and repair of 
the Cumberland road — the amendment offered by Mr. Buchanan, 
which went to strike out the first seven sections of the bill, and to 
provide, in substance, that the several parts of the road passing 
through different States should be ceded to those States, provided 
they would erect toll gates -upon it, and keep it in repair, being 
under consideration. 

Mr. Buchanan said that the bill and the amendment now 
before the Committee presented a subject for discussion of the 
deepest interest to the American people. It is not a question 
[said Mr. B.] whether we shall keep the road in repair by annual 
appropriations; nor whether we shall expend other millions in 
constructing other Cumberland roads; these would be compara- 
tively unimportant: but it is a question, upon the determination 
of which, in my humble judgment, depends the continued exist- 
ence of the Federal constitution, in any thing like its native purity. 
Let it once be established that the Federal Government can enter 
the dominion of the States; interfere with their domestic con- 
cerns ; erect toll gates over all the military, commercial, and post 
roads, within their territories, and define and punish, by laws of 
Congress, in the courts of the United States, offences committed 
upon these roads ; and the barriers, which were erected by our 
ancestors with so much care, between Federal and State power, 
are entirely prostrated. This single act would, in itself, be a 
longer stride towards consolidation than the Federal Govern- 
ment have ever made ; and it would be a precedent for establish- 
ing a construction for the Federal constitution so vague, and so 
indefinite, that it might be made to mean any thing, or nothing. 

It is not my purpose, upon the present occasion, again to 
agitate the questions which have so often been discussed in this 
House, as to the powers of Congress in regard to Internal Im- 
provements. For my own part, I cheerfully accord to the Federal 
Government the power of subscribing stock, in companies incor- 
porated by the States, for the purpose of making roads and 
canals ; and I entertain no doubt whatever, but that we can, under 



1 Register of Debates, 20 Cong. 2 Sess. 1828-1829, V. 240-244. 



384 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

the constitution, appropriate the money of our constituents directly 
to the construction of Internal Improvements, with the consent 
of the States through which they may pass. These powers I shall 
ever be willing to exercise, upon all proper occasions. But I 
shall never be driven to support any road or any canal, which my 
judgment disapproves, by a fear of the senseless clamor which 
is always attempted to be raised against members upon this floor, 
as enemies to Internal Improvement, who dare to vote against any 
measure which the Committee on Roads and Canals think proper 
to bring before this House. It was my intention to discuss the 
power of Congress to pass the bill, and its policy, separately. 
Upon reflection, I find these subjects are so intimately blended, 
they cannot easily be separated. I shall, therefore, consider them 
together. 

Before, however, I enter upon the subject, it will be neces- 
sary to present a short historical sketch of the Cumberland road. 
It owes its origin to a compact between the State of Ohio and the 
United States. In 1802, Congress proposed to the convention 
which formed the constitution of Ohio, that they would grant to 
that State one section of land in each township, for the use of 
schools ; that they would also grant to it several tracts of land on 
which there were salt springs; and that five per cent, of the net 
proceeds of the future sales of public lands within its territory 
should be applied to the purpose of making public roads, " leading 
from the navigable waters emptying into the Atlantic to the Ohio, 
to the said State, and through the same." The act. however, dis- 
tinctly declares that such roads shall be laid out under the author- 
ity of Congress, " with the consent of the several States through 
which the road shall pass." These terms were offered by Con- 
gress, to the State of Ohio, provided she would exempt, by an 
irrevocable ordinance, all the land which should be sold by the 
United States within her territory, from every species of taxation, 
for the space of five years after the day of sale. This proposition 
of Congress was accepted by the State of Ohio ; and it thus became 
a compact, the terms of which could not be changed without the 
consent of both the contracting parties. By the terms of the 
compact, this five per cent, of the nett proceeds of the sales of the 
public land was applicable to two objects: the first, the construc- 
tion of roads leading from the Atlantic to the State of Ohio ; and 
the second, the construction of roads within that State. In 1803, 
Congress, at the re(|uest of Ohio, apportioned this fund between 
these two objects. Three of the five per cent, was appropriated 



1829] SPEECH ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 385 

to the construction of roads within the State; leaving- only two 
per cent, applicable to roads leading from the navigable waters of 
the Atlantic to it. 

In March, 1806, Congress determined to apply this two per 
cent, fund to the object for which it was destined, and passed " An 
act to regulate the laying out and making of a road from Cum- 
berland, in the State of Maryland, to the State of Ohio." Under 
the provisions of this act, before the President could proceed to 
cut a single tree upon the route of the road, it was made neces- 
sary to obtain the consent of the States through which it passed. 
The Federal Government asked Maryland, Pennsylvania, and 
Virginia, for permission to make it, and each of them granted 
this privilege in the same manner that they would have done to a 
private individual, or to a corporation created by their own laws. 

Congress, at that day, asserted no other right than a mere 
power to appropriate the money of their constituents to the con- 
struction of this road, after the consent of these States should be 
obtained. The idea of a sovereign power in this Government to 
make the road, and to exercise jurisdiction over it, for the purpose 
of keeping it in repair, does not, then, appear to have ever entered 
the imagination of the warmest advocate for federal power. The 
federalism of that day would have shrunk with horror from such 
a spectre. There is a circumstance worthy of remark in the act of 
the Legislature of Pennsylvania, which was passed in April, 1807, 
authorizing the President of the United States to open this road. 
It grants this power upon condition that the road should pass 
through Uniontown and Washington, if practicable ? The grant 
was accepted upon this condition, and the road was constructed. 
Its length is one hundred and thirty miles, and its construction 
and repairs have cost the United States one million seven hundred 
and sixty-six thousand one hundred and sixty-six dollars and 
thirty-eight cents; whilst the two per cent, fund which we had 
bound ourselves to apply to this purpose, amounted, on the 30th 
of June, 1822, the date of the last official statement within my 
knowledge, only to the sum of one hundred and eighty-seven 
thousand seven hundred and eighty-six dollars and thirty-one 
cents ; less than one-ninth of the cost of the road. This road has 
cost the United States more than thirteen thousand five hundred 
dollars per mile. This extravagant expenditure shows, con- 
clusively, that it is much more politic for us to enlist individual 
interest in the cause of Internal Improvement, by subscribing 
stock, than to become ourselves sole proprietors. Any Govern- 
25 



386 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

ment, unless under extraordinary circumstances, will pay one- 
tliird more for constructing a road or canal, than would be ex- 
pended by individuals in accomplishing the same object. 

I shall now proceed to the argument. Upon a review of 
this brief history, what is the conclusion at which we must arrive? 
That this road was made by the United States, as a mere proprie- 
tor, to carry into effect a contract with the State of Ohio, and 
not as a sovereign. In its construction, the Federal Government 
proceeded as any corporation or private individual would have 
done. We asked the States for permission to make the road 
through the territories over which their sovereign authority ex- 
tended. After that permission had been obtained, we appropri- 
ated the money and constructed the road. The State of Pennsyl- 
vania even annexed a condition to her grant, with which the 
United States complied. She also conferred upon the agents of 
the United States the power of taking materials for the con- 
struction and repair of this road, without the consent of the 
owner, making a just compensation therefor. This compensa- 
tion was to be ascertained under the laws of the State, and not 
under those of the United States. The mode of proceeding to 
assess damages in such cases against the United States was pre- 
cisely the same as it is against corporations, created by her own 
laws, for the purpose of constructing roads. 

What, then, does this precedent establish? Simply, that 
the United States may appropriate monev for the construction of 
a road through the territories of a State, with its consent; and I 
do not entertain the least doubt but that we possess this power. 
What does the present bill propose? To change the character 
which the United States has hitherto sustained, in relation to this 
road, from that of a simple proprietor to a sovereign. To declare 
to the nation, that, although they had to ask the States of Mary- 
land, Pennsylvania and Virginia, for permission to make the 
road, now, after it is completed, they will exercise jurisdiction 
over it, and collect tolls upon it, under the authority of their own 
laws, for the purpose of keeping it in repair. We will not ask the 
States to erect toll-gates for us. We are determined to exercise 
that power ourselves. The Federal Government first introduced 
itself into the States as a friend, by permission; it now wishes to 
hold possession as a sovereign, by power. This road was made in 
the manner that one independent sovereign would construct a 
road through the territories of another. Had Virginia been a 
party to the compact with Ohio, instead of the United States, she 



1829] SPEECH ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 387 

would have asked the permission of Alaryland and Pennsylvania 
to construct the Cumberland Road through their territories, and 
it would have been granted. But what would have been our 
astonishment, after this permission, had Virginia attempted to as- 
sume jurisdiction over the road in Pennsylvania, to erect toll- 
gates upon it under the authority of her own laws, and to punish 
offenders against these laws in her own courts. Yet the two cases 
are nearly parallel. 

The right to demand toll, and to stop and punish passengers 
for refusing to pay it, is emphatically a sovereign right, and has 
ever been so considered amongst civilized nations. The power to 
erect toll-gates necessarily implies, ist, The stoppage of the pass- 
enger until he shall pay the toll ; 2d, His trial and punishment, if 
he should, either by force or by fraud, evade, or attempt to 
evade, its payment; 3d, A discretionary power as to the 
amount of toll; 4th, The trial and punishment of persons 
who may wilfully injure the road, or violate the police established 
upon it. These powers are necessarily implied. Without the 
exercise of them, you could not proceed with safety to collect the 
toll for a single day. Other powers will soon be exercised. If 
you compel passengers to pay toll, the power of protecting them 
whilst travelling along your road is almost a necessary incident. 
The sovereign, who receives the toll, ought naturally to possess 
the power of protecting him who pays it. To vest the power of 
demanding toll in one sovereign, and the protection of the travel- 
ler's person in another, would be almost an absurdity. The Fed- 
eral Government would probably, ere long, exercise the power of 
trying and punishing murders and robberies, and all other of- 
fences committed upon the road. To what jurisdiction would the 
trial and punishment of these offences necessarily belong? To 
the courts of the United States, and to them alone. In Ohio, in 
New York, in Virginia, and in Maryland, it has been determined 
that State courts, even if Congress should confer it, have no 
jurisdiction over any penal action, or criminal offence, against the 
laws of the United States. Even if these decisions were incor- 
rect, still it has never been seriously contended that State courts 
were bound to take jurisdiction in such cases. It must be ad- 
mitted, by all, that Congress have not the power to compel an 
execution of their criminal or penal laws by the courts of the 
States. This is sufificient for my argument. Even if the power 
existed, in State courts, they never ought, unless upon extra- 
ordinary occasions, to try and to punish offences committed 



388 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

against the United States. The peace and the harmony of the 
people of this country require that the powers of the two govern- 
ments should never be blended. The dividing line between their 
separate jurisdictions should be clearly marked; otherwise dan- 
gerous collisions between them must be the inevitable conse- 
quence. In two of the States through which this road passes, it 
has already been determined that their courts cannot take juris- 
diction over offences committed against the laws of Congress. 
What, then, is the inevitable consequence? All the penal enact- 
ments of this bill, or of the future bills which it will become 
necessary to pass to supply its defects, must be carried into execu- 
tion by the Federal courts. Any citizen of the United States, 
charged with the most trifling offence against the police of this 
road, must be dragged for trial to the Federal court of that State 
within whose jurisdiction it is alleged to have been committed. 
If committed in Maryland, the trial must take place in Baltimore; 
if in Pennsylvania, at Clarksburg. 

The distance of one hundred or two hundred miles, which 
he would be compelled to travel to take his trial, and the expenses 
which he must necessarily incur, would, in themselves, be a severe 
punishment for a more aggravated offence. Besides, the people 
of the neighborhood would be harassed in attending as witnesses 
at such a great distance from their places of abode. These, and 
many other inconveniences, which I shall not enumerate, would 
soon compel Congress to authorize the appointment of justices 
of the peace, or some other inferior tribunals, along the whole 
extent of the Cumberland Road. 

Can any man lay his hand upon his heart and say that, in 
his conscience, he believes the Federal Constitution ever intended 
to bestow such powers on Congress? The great divisions of 
power, distinctly marked in that instrument, are external and 
internal. The first are conferred upon the General Government 
— the last, with but few exceptions, and those distinctly defined, 
remain in possession of the States. It never — never was intended 
that the vast and mighty machinery of this Government should 
be introduced into the domestic, the local, the interior concerns of 
the States, or that it should spend its power in collecting toll at 
a turnpike gate. I have not been presenting possible cases to the 
committee. I have confined myself to what must be the neces- 
sary effects of the passage of the bill now before us. By what 
authority is such a tremendous power claimed? That it is not 
expressly given by the Constitution, is certain. If it exists at all, 



1829] SPEECH ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 389 

it must, therefore, be incidental to some express power ; and in the 
language of the Constitution, " be necessary and proper for carry- 
ing that power into execution." From the very nature of inci- 
dental power, it cannot transcend the specific power which calls it 
into existence. The stream cannot flow higher than its fountain. 
This principle applies, with peculiar force, to the construction of 
the constitution. For the purpose of carrying into effect any of 
its specific powers, it would be absurd to contend that you might 
exercise another power, greater and more dangerous than that 
expressly given. The means must be subordinate to the end. 
Were any other construction to prevail, this Government would 
no longer be one of limited powers. 

The present case affords a striking and forcible illustration 
of this principle. Let it be granted that you have a right, as 
proprietor, by the permission of the States, to make a road 
through their territories, can it ever follow, as an incident to 
this mere power of appropriating the public money, that you may 
exercise jurisdiction over this very road, as a sovereign? If you 
could, the incident is as much greater than the principal, as sov- 
ereign is superior to individual power. It does follow that you 
can keep the road in repair, by appropriations, in the same manner 
that you have made it ; but this is the utmost limit of your power. 
What, sir ! Exclusive jurisdiction over the road, for its preserva- 
tion, and for the punishment of all offenders who travel upon it, 
and that as an incident to the mere power of expending your 
money upon its construction ! The idea is absurd. 

Under the power given to Congress " to establish post offices 
and post roads," the Federal Government possess the undoubted 
right of converting any road already constructed, within any 
State of this Union, into a post road. Let it also be granted, 
for the sake of the argimient, that they possess the power, inde- 
pendently of the will of the States, to construct as many post 
roads throughout the Union as they think proper, and to keep 
them in repair; does it follow that. they can establish toll gates 
upon such roads? Certainly not. What is the nature of the 
power conferred upon Congress? It is a mere right to carry and 
to protect the mail. It is confined to a single purpose — to the 
transportation of the mail, and the punishment of offences which 
violate that right. This is the sole object of the power — the sole 
purpose for which it was called into existence. Over some post 
roads, the mail is carried once per day ; and over others once per 
week. With what justice can it be contended that this right of 



390 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

passage for a single purpose — this occasional use of the roads 
within the different States for post roads — vests in Congress the 
power of closing up these roads against all the citizens of those 
States, at all times, until they have paid such a toll as we may 
think proper to impose. Let me present the naked argument of 
gentlemen before their own eyes. Congress have the right, un- 
der the constitution, " to establish post offices and post roads." 
As an incident they possess the power of constructing post roads. 
As another incident to this right of passage for a single purpose 
they possess the power to assume jurisdiction over all post roads 
in the different States, and prevent any person from passing over 
them, unless upon such terms as they may prescribe. This would, 
indeed, be construction construed. I would ask the gentleman 
from Virginia [Mr. Mercer] to furnish the Committee with an 
answer to this argument. If I wxre to grant to that gentleman 
a right of passage, for a particular purpose only, over a road 
which belonged to me, what would be my surprise and my in- 
dignation, were he to shut it up, by the erection of toll gates, and 
prohibit me from passing unless I paid him toll. 

Should Congress act upon the precedent which the passage 
of this bill would establish, it is impossible to foresee the dangers 
which must follow, to the States and to the people of this country. 
Upon this branch of the question, permit me to quote the lan- 
guage of Mr. Monroe, in his celebrated message of May, 1822, 
denying the constitutional power of Congress to erect toll gates 
on the Cumberland road : " If, said he. the United States pos- 
sessed the power contended for under this grant, might they not, 
in adopting the roads of the individual States for the carriage of 
the mail, as has been done, assume jurisdiction over them, and 
preclude a right to interfere with, or alter them? Might they 
not establish turnpikes, and exercise all the other acts of sov- 
ereignty above stated, over such roads, necessary to protect them 
from injury, and defray the expense of repairing them? Surely, 
if the right exists, these consequences necessarily followed, as 
soon as the road w-as established. The absurdity of such a pre- 
tension must be apparent to all who examine it. In this way, a 
large portion of the territory of every State might be taken from 
it : for there is scarcely a road in any State which wnll not be used 
for the transportation of the mail. A new field for legislation 
and internal government would thus be opened." Arguments of 
the same nature would apply with equal, if not greater force, to 
those roads which might be used by the United States for the 



18^29] SPEECH ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 391 

transportation of military stores, or as the medium of commerce 
between the different States. I shall not now enlarge upon this 
branch of the subject, believing it, as I do, to be wholly unneces- 
sary. 

There is another view of this subject, which I deem to be 
conclusive. The constitution of the United States provides that 
" Congress shall have power to exercise exclusive legislation, in 
all cases whatsoever, over such district (not exceeding ten miles 
square) as may, by cession of particular States, and the accept- 
ance of Congress, become the seat of the Government of the 
United States, and to exercise the like authority over all places 
purchased by the consent of the Legislature of the State in which 
the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, 
dock-yards, and other needful buildings." This is the only 
clause in the constitution which authorizes the Federal Govern- 
ment to acquire jurisdiction over any portion of the territory of 
the States; and this power is expressly confined to such forts, 
magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, and other needful buildings, as 
the States may consider necessary for the defence of the country. 
You will thus, sir, perceive, with what jealousy our ancestors 
conferred jurisdiction upon this Government — even over such 
places as were absolutely necessary for the exercise of the power 
of war. This power — which is the power of self-defence — of 
self-preservation — the power given to this Government of wield- 
ing the whole physical force of the country, for the preservation 
of its existence and its liberties — does not confer any implied 
jurisdiction over the smallest portion of territory. An express 
authority is given to acquire jurisdiction, for military and for 
naval purposes, and for them alone, with the consent of the States. 
Unless that consent has been first obtained, the vast power of 
war confers no incidental jurisdiction, even over the cannon in 
your national fortifications. How, then, can it be contended, with 
the least hope of success, that the same constitution, which thus 
expressly limits our power of acquiring jurisdiction, to particular 
spots, necessary for the purpose of national defence, should, by 
implication, as an incident to the power to establish post offices 
and post roads, authorize us to assume jurisdiction over a road 
one hundred and thirty miles in length, and over all the other 
post roads in the country. If this construction be correct, all the 
limitations upon Federal power, contained in the constitution, are 
idle and vain. There is no power which this Government shall 
ever wish to usurp, which cannot, by ingenuity, be found lurking 



392 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

in some of the express powers granted by the constitution. In 
my humble judgment, the argument in favor of the constructive 
power to pass the sedition law is much more plausible than any 
which can be urged by the advocates of this bill, in favor of its 
passage. I beg gentlemen to reflect, before they vote in its 
favor. 

I thank the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Vance] for having 
reminded me of the resolution passed by the Legislature of Penn- 
sylvania, at their last session, which authorizes the Federal Gov- 
ernment to erect toll-gates upon this road, within that Common- 
wealth; to " enforce the collection of tolls, and, generally, to do 
and perform any and every other act and thing which may be 
deemed necessary, to ensure the permanent repair and preserva- 
tion of the said road." 

I feel the most unfeigned respect for the Legislature of my 
native State. Their deliberate opinion, upon any subject, will 
always have a powerful influence over my judgment. It is fairly 
entitled to as much consideration as the opinion of this or any 
other legislative body in the Union. This resolution, however, 
was adopted, as I have been informed, without much deliberation, 
and without debate. It owes its passage to the anxious desire 
which that body feel to preserve the Cumberland road from ruin. 
The constitutional question was not brought into discussion. Had 
it been fairly submitted to that Republican Legislature, I most 
solemnly believe they would have been the last in this Union to 
sanction the assumption, by this Government, of a jurisdiction 
so ultra-federal in its nature, and so well calculated to destroy the 
rights of the States. 

But this resolution can have no influence upon the present 
discussion. The people of the State of Pennsylvania never con- 
ferred upon their Legislature the power to cede' jurisdiction over 
any portion of their territory to the United States, or to any 
other sovereign. If the Legislatures of the different States 
could exercise such a power, the road to consolidation would be 
direct. If they can cede jurisdiction to this Government over 
any portion of their territories, they can cede the whole, and thus 
altogether destroy the Federal system. 

Even if the States possessed the power to cede, the United 
States have no power to accept such cessions. Their authority 
to accept cessions of jurisdiction is confined to places " for the 
erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, and other 
needful buildings." Mr. Monroe, in the message to which I have 



1829] SPEECH ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 393 

already referred, declares his opinion, " that Congress do not 
possess this power ; that the States, individually, cannot grant it : 
for, although they may assent to the appropriation of money, 
within their limits, for such purposes, they can grant no power 
of jurisdiction, or sovereignty, by special compacts with the 
United States." 

I think it is thus rendered abundantly clear, that, if Con- 
gress do not possess the power, under the Federal constitution, 
to pass this bill, the States through which the road passes cannot 
confer it upon them. I feel convinced that even the gentleman 
who reported this bill [Mr. Mercer] will not contend that the 
resolution of the Legislature of Pennsylvania could bestow any 
jurisdiction upon this Government. I am justified in this infer- 
ence, because that resolution is, in its nature, conditional, and 
requires that the amount of tolls collected in Pennsylvania shall 
be applied, exclusively, to the repair of the road within that State; 
and the present bill contains no provision to carry this condition 
into effect. The gentleman cannot, therefore, derive his author- 
ity to pass this bill from a grant, the provisions of which he has 
disregarded. 

This question has already been settled, so far as a solemn 
legislative precedent can settle any question. During the session 
of 1 82 1-2, a bill, similar in its provisions to the one now before 
the Committee, passed both Houses of Congress. The vote, on 
its passage in this House, was eighty-seven in the affirmative, and 
sixty-eight in the negative. Mr. Monroe, then President of the 
United States, returned this bill to the House of Representatives, 
with his objections. So powerful, and so convincing, were his 
arguments, that, upon its re-consideration, but sixty-eight mem- 
bers voted in the affirmative, whilst seventy-two voted in the 
negative. Thus, sir, you perceive, that this House have already 
solemnly declared, in accordance with the deliberate opinion of 
the late President of the United States, that Congress do not 
possess the power to erect toll-gates upon the Cumberland road. 
That distinguished individual was the last of the race of Revolu- 
tionary Presidents, and, from the soundness of his judgment, and 
the elevated stations which he has occupied, his opinion is entitled 
to the utmost respect. He was an actor in many of the political 
scenes of that day when the constitution was framed, and when 
it went into operation, under the auspices of Washington — " all 
which he saw, and part of which he was." He is, therefore, one 
of the few surviving statesmen, who, from actual knowledge, 



394 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

can inform the present generation what were the opinions of the 
past. The solemnity and the abihty with which he has resisted 
the exercise of the power of Congress to pass this bill prove, con- 
clusively, the great importance which he attached to the subject. 
During that session, which was the first I had the honor of 
a seat in this House, I voted for the passage of that bill. I had 
not reflected upon the constitutional question, and I was an advo- 
cate of the policy of keeping the road in repair by collecting tolls 
from those who travelled upon it. After I read the constitutional 
objections of Mr. Monroe, my opinion was changed, and I have 
ever since been endeavoring, upon all proper occasions, to atone 
for my vote, by advocating a cession of the road to the respective 
States through which it passes, that they may erect toll-gates upon 
it and keep it in repair. There was a time in the history of 
this country — I refer to the days of the first President of the 
United States — when this Government was feeble, and when, in 
addition to its own powers, the weight of his personal character 
was necessary fairly to put it in motion. Jealousy of Federal 
power was then the order of the day. The gulf of consolidation 
then yawned before the imagination of many of our wisest and 
best patriots, ready to swallow up the rights of the States and 
the liberties of the people. In those days, this vast machine had 
scarcely got into regular motion. Its power and its patronage 
were then in their infancy, and there was, perhaps, more danger 
that the jealousy of the States should destroy the efficiency of 
the Federal Government, than that it should crush their power. 
Times have changed. The days of its feebleness and of childhood 
have passed away. It is now a giant — a Briareus — stretching 
forth its hundred arms, dispensing its patronage, and increasing 
its power over every portion of the Union. What patronage and 
what power have the States to oppose to this increasing influence? 
Glance your eye over the extent of the Union; compare State 
offices with those of the United States; and whether avarice or 
ambition be consulted, those which belong to the General Govern- 
ment are greatly to be preferred to the offices which the States 
can bestow. Jealousy of Federal power — not of a narrow and 
mean character, but a watchful and uncompromising jealousy — 
is now the dictate of the soundest patriotism. The General Gov- 
ernment possesses the exclusive right to impose duties upon im- 
ports — by far the most productive and the most popular source of 
revenue. United and powerful efforts are now making to destroy 
the revenue which the States derive from sales at auction. This 



1829] SPEECH ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 395 

Government is now asked to interpose its power between the 
buyer and seller, and put down public sales of merchandise within 
the different States — a subject heretofore believed to be within 
the exclusive jurisdiction of the State sovereignties. Whilst the 
Federal Government has been advancing with rapid strides, the 
people of the States have seldom been awakened to a sense of 
their danger. In the late political struggle, they were aroused, 
and they nobly maintained their own rights. This, I trust, will 
always be the case hereafter. Thank Heaven! whilst the people 
continue true to themselves, the constitution contains within 
itself those principles which must ever preserve it. From its 
very nature — from a difference of opinion as to the constructive 
powers which may be necessary and proper to carry those which 
are enumerated into effect — it must ever call into existence two 
parties, the one jealous of Federal, the other of State power; 
the one anxious to extend Federal influence, the other wedded 
to State rights; the one desirous to limit, the other to extend, 
the power and the patronage of the General Government. In 
the intermediate space there will be much debatable ground; 
but a general outline will still remain sufficiently distinct to 
mark the division between the political parties which have di- 
vided, and which will probably continue to divide, the people of 
this country. Jealousy of Federal power had long been slum- 
bering. The voice of Virginia sounding the alarm has at length 
awakened several of her sister States ; and, although they believe 
her to be too strict in her construction of the Constitution and 
her doctrines concerning State rights, yet, they are now willing 
to do justice to the steadiness and patriotism of her political 
character. She has kept alive a wholesome jealousy of Federal 
power. If, then, there be a party in this country friendly to 
the rights of the States and of the people, I call upon them to 
oppose the passage of this bill. Should it become a law, it will 
establish a precedent under the authority of which the sovereigii 
power of this Government can be brought home into the domestic 
concerns of every State in the Union. We may then take under 
our own jurisdiction every road over which the mail is carried; 
every road over which our soldiers and warlike munitions may 
pass ; every road used for the purpose of carrying on commerce 
between the several States. Once establish this strained con- 
struction of the Federal Constitution, and I would ask gentle- 
men to point out the limit where this splendid government shall 



396 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

be compelled to stay its chariot wheels. Might it not then drive 
on to consolidation, under the sanction of the Constitution? 

Is there any necessity for venturing upon this dangerous and 
doubtful measure? I appeal to those gentlemen who suppose 
the power to be clear, what motive they can have for forcing this 
measure upon us, who are of a different opinion? Can it make 
any difference to them whether those toll-gates shall be erected 
under a law of the United States, or under State authority? 
Cannot the Legislature of Pennsylvania enact this bill into a law 
as well as the Congress of the United States ? Nobody will doubt 
their right. I trust no gentleman upon this floor will question 
the fidelity of that State in complying with all her engagements. 
She has ever been true to every trust. If she should accept of the 
cession, as I have no doubt she would, I will pledge myself that 
you shall never again hear of the road, unless it be that she has 
kept it in good repair, and that under her care it has answered 
every purpose for which it was intended. 

I know that some popular feeling has been excited against 
myself in that portion of Pennsylvania through which the road 
passes. I have been represented as one of its greatest enemies. 
I now take occasion thus publicly to deny this allegation. It is 
true that I cannot vote in favor of the passage of this bill, and 
thus, in my judgment, violate the oath which I have taken to sup- 
port the Constitution of the United States. No man can expect 
this from me. But it is equally true that I have heretofore sup- 
ported appropriations for the repair of this road ; and should my 
amendment prevail. I shall vote in favor of the appropriation of 
one hundred thousand dollars for that purpose which is contained 
in this bill. 



REMARKS, JANUARY 20, 1829, 

ON THE PROPOSED TERRITORY OF HURON. i 

Mr. Buchanan disavowed every thing like hostility to the bill. 
He had desired its postponement only for the obtainment of 
farther information ; having received this, and being now satisfied 
as to the extent and the necessities of the population to be pro- 
vided for, he was decidedly in favor of the bill. By the original 
contract with Virginia, the United States were bound to erect 
the territory ceded by her into new States, so soon as they should 



' Register of Debates, 20 Cong. 2 Sess. 1828-1829, V. 245. 



1829] PRESIDENTIAL TERMS 397 

acquire the requisite population ; but, before they could become 
States, they must be first erected into territories. On this point 
the Government had no discretion ; it was bound by contract ; and 
if any one of the Territories was so situated as to require it, such 
government might be erected a year or two previous to the period 
when the population would entitle them to demand it. As to 
the objections of his friend and colleague, (on whom he passed a 
handsome compliment) he did not consider it of very great force. 
The extent of the country west of Michigan was so great, and the 
limits of the Michigan Territory were so obviously defined by 
nature herself, that its settlement would in no wise be retarded 
by the measure proposed. 



REMARKS, FEBRUARY 6, 1829, 

ON A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION TO RENDER 
THE PRESIDENT INELIGIBLE FOR A SECOND TERM.i 

Mr. Buchanan said he should vote in favor of the postpone- 
ment of this resolution until the 3d of March. He did not think 
that the great constitutional question which it presented ought to 
be decided, without more time and more reflection than it would 
be possible to bestow upon it at this late period of the session. We 
had heard the able and ingenious argument of the gentleman from 
Virginia, [Mr. Smyth] in favor of the proposition, whilst no 
argument had been urged upon the other side of the question. 
Mr. B. said that a more important question could not be pre- 
sented in a republic, than a proposition to change the constitution 
in regard to the election of the Supreme Executive Magistrate. 
'' It is better to bear the ills we have, than fly to others that we 
know not of," unless the existing evils are great, and we have a 
moral certainty that the change will not be productive of still 
greater evils. The constitution has been once changed since its 
adoption, and it is now generally admitted, by reflecting men, 
that the alteration was for the worse, and not for the better. 
This change grew out of the excitement of the moment. It pro- 
vided against the existence of an evil which, probably, would not 
again have occurred for a long period of time ; but, in doing so, 
it has rendered it almost certain that the election of a President 
shall often devolve upon the House of Representatives. Had the 
constitution remained in its original form ; had each elector con- 
tinued to vote for two persons, instead of one; it could rarely, if 

' Register of Debates, 20 Cong. 2 Sess. 1828-1829, V. 320. 



398 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

ever, have occurred, that some one candidate would not have 
received a majority of all the electoral votes. By this change, we 
have thus entailed a great evil upon the countr}^ 

The example of Washington, which has been followed by 
Jefferson, Madison, and Alonroe, has forever determined that 
no President shall be more than once re-elected. This principle is 
now become as sacred as if it w^ere written in the constitution. I 
would incline to leave to the people of the United States, without 
incorporating it in the constitution, to decide whether a Presi- 
dent should serve longer than one term. The day may come, 
when dangers shall lower over us, and when we may have a 
President at the helm of State who possesses the confidence of the 
country, and is better able to weather the stonn than any other 
pilot ; shall we, then, under such circumstances, deprive the people 
of the United States of the power of obtaining his services for a 
second term? Shall we pass a decree, as fixed as fate, to bind 
the American people, and prevent them from ever re-electing such 
a man? I am not afraid to trust them with this power. 

There is another reason why the House should not be called 
upon to decide this question hastily. It is a great evil to keep the 
public mind continually excited, as it would be, by the election of 
a new President at the end of each term of four years. Under 
the existing system, it is probable that, as a general rule, a Presi- 
dent, elected by the people, will once be re-elected, unless he shall 
by his conduct have deprived himself of public confidence. This 
will, in many instances, prevent the recurrence of a political storm 
more than once in eight years. These are some of the sugges- 
tions which induce me to vote for the postponement of this reso- 
lution to a day that will render it impossible for us to act upon it 
during the present session of Congress. We ought to have 
ample time to consider this subject before we act. 



SPEECH, FEBRUARY 12, 1829, 

ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD.' 

Mr. Buchanan addressed the Chair as follows : I know that 
the committee are anxious to dispose of the question now under 
discussion as speedily as possible. It is natural they should 
feel this desire, because it has already occupied too much of 



' Register of Debates, 20 Cong. 2 Sess. 1828-1829, V., appended pages 
(after p. 391), 1-7. 



1829] SPEECH ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 399 

their time. I shall therefore confine myself to as brief a reply 
as possible. I am anxious that the question should this day 
be decided in Committee of the Whole. If there be other gentle- 
men desirous of taking part in the debate, I would suggest to 
them the propriety of deferring their remarks until the bill shall 
have come into the House. 

The gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. Mercer,] instead of 
complaining, ought to congratulate himself on the course which 
this debate has taken. In opening it, I confined myself strictly to 
the questions of the power and the policy of erecting toll-gates on 
the Cumberland road, under the authority of this Government. But 
the subject, against my wishes, has since expanded, and the debate 
has extended over the whole doctrine of internal improvements. 
A wide field has thus been opened to the gentleman, from which 
I should have excluded him; and he has made a brilliant and 
sometimes an argumentative speech on the general question of 
our power to construct roads and canals. I shall not follow him 
in this discursive range, but shall confine myself to the two 
questions which I raised at the commencement of the debate, 
and shall reply only to such of his arguments as had a bearing 
upon these questions. This will be an easy task, as the gentle- 
man gave them but passing notices. 

The extension of this debate beyond its due limits has given 
the gentleman another advantage. It has enabled him to sound 
the alarm, and to operate upon the fears of the friends of internal 
improvements. He has called upon them to stand firm and united 
against the amendment, and has endeavored to create the belief 
that its adoption would prostrate the whole system. He has de- 
nounced my open defection from the cause, and the secret deser- 
tion of two other friends, [Mr. Stewart and Mr. Smith,] merely 
because they declared that they would still vote for the bill even 
if the amendment should prevail. Is this fair? Can the gen- 
tleman be serious when he declares that upon the vote on this 
amendment hangs the fate of internal improvements? Will he 
really vote against this bill, a bill which appropriates $100,000 
for the repair of the Cumberland road, should a majority of the 
committee, upon the whole, think it better that the collection 
of tolls necessary for its future preservation and repair should be 
made under State rather than under United States authority? 
If so, instead of being a great friend to internal improvements, 
he would become their greatest enemy. 

The gentleman seems determined that the whole question 



400 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

in relation to internal improvements shall depend upon the single 
point — our right to erect toll-gates. The entire system is to be 
arrested, so far as his influence may extend, unless my amend- 
ment shall be defeated. And why? Can the gentleman point 
to a single beneficial purpose which will not be equally accom- 
plished without the aid of this power? Can its abandonment 
interfere with your subscriptions of stock, or your appropriations 
of money to construct roads and canals? No, sir, so far from 
it, that I do most solemnly believe the exercise of this dangerous 
and unconstitutional power would roll back the tide of public 
opinion which now runs so strongly in favor of internal im- 
provements, and endangers the whole system. I protest against 
the doctrine of the gentleman. I protest against any idea going 
abroad, that, because either we cannot or we will not erect toll- 
gates upon the Cumberland road, therefore we have abandoned 
all power in relation to internal improvements. This would be 
placing its existence upon a fearful cast. The principles for 
which I contend will carry the power of this Government to the 
point at which exclusive State jurisdiction commences. Beyond 
that limit it ought never to pass. All the beneficial effects of 
this power would thus be conferred upon the people, whilst there 
could be no danger from collision between State and United 
States authority. 

If the power to erect toll-gates were written in sunbeams on 
the face of the constitution, still true policy would forbid its exer- 
cise. If necessary, I should be willing to rest this argument on the 
ground of policy alone. The gentleman has warned us, that the 
Committee on Roads and Canals have placed this bill in the front 
of the battle, so that if it passed it might be a guide to their 
future conduct. It must, then, be their intention inseparably to 
connect with the construction of roads and canals the erection of 
toll-gates by Congress for their preservation and repairs. Permit 
me. then, to make some remarks on the policy of such a principle, 
apart from the power. 

What is the authority which we must necessarily exercise 
upon this road, should we assume the jurisdiction over it con- 
templated by the bill? It is that of exclusive legislation, for 
the purpose of preserving it from injury, of repairing it, of col- 
lecting the necessary tolls upon it, and of punishing all offences 
committed against the police which we may establish. Consid- 
ered as a road, or right of way, our jurisdiction necessarily be- 
comes exclusive. This results from the nature of things. As a 



1829] SPEECH ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 401 

road, the States through which it passes must lose all power over 
it. Distinct sovereignties cannot act, at the same time and in 
the same manner, upon the same object, more than two solid 
bodies can, at the same moment, occupy the same space. 

I admit the correctness of the doctrine maintained by the 
gentleman from Virginia, that this exclusive legislation does not 
necessarily extend to the punishment of crimes committed on the 
road, which are not connected with the right of way; much less 
would it embrace the jurisdiction over contracts. But still, 
although thus limited, there must remain to Congress an ex- 
clusive jurisdiction, for the purpose of preserving and repairing 
it, and collecting the necessary tolls. 

The present bill is grossly defective even for these purposes. 
Whether its defects were the result of mere inadvertence, or 
whether the committee apprehended danger to the bill from insert- 
ing those penalties essentially necessary to the existence and 
preservation of any turnpike, I shall not pretend to determine. It 
is possible that it may have been deemed expedient to establish the 
principle of erecting toll-gates, by one bill; and to reserve the 
infliction of such penalties as might startle the fears of the timid, 
for a supplement. This is the usual march of power. 

The gentleman has informed us that there are but three 
penalties in the bill. This is very true: and for any efiicient 
purpose the committee might as well have followed the example 
of their predecessors, and reported the bill without any penalty. 
It is a curious fact in the history of this matter, that the first bill 
reported to erect toll-gates on the Cumberland road provided 
no remedy, no fine, no penalty, in any case whatever; and even 
in the present bill no penalty is denounced against the traveller 
who refuses to pay the toll. This is left entirely within his own 
discretion. 

What are the three penalties contained in this bill? The 
first is against the omission to set up directors on the road, 
cautioning drivers of carriages to pass on the left of each other. 
Against whom is this penalty denounced? Is it against the 
President of the United States, the superintendent of the road, 
or the toll-gatherers ? On this subject we are left in utter dark- 
ness by the bill. So far as any inference can be drawn from its 
provisions, I am rather inclined to believe the President would 
be the object of the penalty; and yet I cannot think such was 
the intention of the committee. A penalty, without designation 

26 



402 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

of the person on whom it is to be inflicted, is something new in 
legislation. 

The second penalty is against toll-gatherers who may un- 
reasonably delay or hinder the passage of travellers through the 
gates, or who shall demand or receive more toll than is due; the 
third, against persons who may wilfully injure the road, or 
obstruct its passage. These are all. 

Present this bill to any man who has ever been a member 
of the Legislature, either of Pennsylvania or Ohio, where the 
subject is well understood, and he will inform you that its pro- 
visions are wholly inadequate to effect the purposes for which 
they ought to have been intended. I shall point out a few of 
its most glaring defects, which, should it become a law, must 
be immediately remedied by a supplement. My sole purpose in 
pursuing this course is to enable the committee to appreciate 
the powers which they are actually granting, and which must 
follow in the train of this measure. 

And first, as I have already stated, this bill inflicts no penalty 
on any traveller either for attempting to pass or for actually pass- 
ing the gates, without the payment of the toll : a most wonderful 
omission. 

Again: for the repair of this road, the right of eminent 
domain must be exercised. It cannot be supposed that all the 
owners of the soil along its course and all the contractors will 
be reasonable men ; and even if they were, they might honestly 
differ in their estimate of the value of the materials necessary 
for its repair. What then is to be done? These materials are 
of such a ponderous nature, that they cannot, without a ruinous 
expense, be transported a great distance. You must follow the 
example of the States, and authorize them to be taken against 
the consent of the owner. And in order to exercise this power, 
you must establish a tribunal to assess their value. On this 
subject the bill is altogether silent; and this very silence would 
be the greatest encouragement for extortion. 

But again : tlie traveller who pays the toll has his rights 
as well as the Government which receives it. Suppose the road 
is suffered to become ruinous, and so much out of repair, that 
it would be unjust to demand toll upon it. \Vliat then? In such 
a case the States have established tribunals to decide this fact. 
and then the gates are thrown open. This bill contains no such 
provision. 

Again: suppose any of the citizens along this turnpike 



1829] SPEECH ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 403 

should make a road upon his own land around the turnpike gates, 
and thus evade the payment of the toll; what is your remedy 
by this bill? Nothing. You are left completely at the mercy 
of all the owners of the soil near each gate, throughout the whole 
extent of the road. This defect must be immediately remedied. 
Penalties must be inflicted both upon the owner of the soil, and 
the passenger who shall in this manner avoid the turnpike gates. 

But I shall not detain the committee and weary myself by 
enumerating the other defects of the bill. The truth is. that the 
code of laws necessary to preserve such a road, and to collect 
toll upon it. must contain many minute provisions, and many 
penalties for the commission of trifling offences. Avhich can only, 
without the greatest inconvenience, be carried into execution bv 
the local jurisdictions of the States. The machinery of the 
General Government is not calculated to give effect to such pro- 
visions. It was never intended for such a purpose. It would 
be monstrous and intolerable oppression to permit the gate- 
keepers along the road to take a citizen of the United States to 
Baltimore, or Pittsburg, or Clarksburg, to be tried before a 
circuit or district court for such an offence as that of defacing 
a milestone. 

But the gentleman from Virginia has insisted that this neces- 
sity does not exist; that State courts and State magistrates 
ought to take cognizance of such offences ; and he has even gone 
so far as to express his astonishment that State judges have 
dared to decide that they would not enforce the criminal and 
penal laws of the United States. On this question, however, 
we have, in opposition to his opinion, the authority of the gentle- 
man from Kentucky, [Mr. Buckner;] and, without disparage- 
ment, I may say he is a higher authority on a point of law than 
the gentleman from Virginia. 

But this question does not now remain open : it has already 
been decided by the State courts; and it is not probable they 
will be driven from their course by the denunciations of the 
gentleman from Virginia. It would be but a poor consolation 
for a citizen who was dragged from the extreme verge of Alle- 
ghany county in Maryland, to be tried for some trifling mis- 
demeanor committed against the police of this road, to be in- 
formed that in the opinion of the gentleman it was a daring act 
in the State tribunals to have refused to take jurisdiction of the 
offence. On this subject their decisions have been uniform, 
as may be seen by a reference to Sergeant's Constitutional Law. 



404 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

pages 271, '2, and '3: and this, notwithstanding the jurisdiction 
may have been expressly given them by act of Congress. In 
Ohio, in New York, in Virginia, in Kentucky, and in Mary- 
land, the question is settled; and that upon constitutional prin- 
ciples, which, in my humble judgment, cannot be controverted. 

But let me direct the gentleman to an authority for which 
he will probably entertain a higher respect than for the judgments 
of State tribunals. I refer to the opinion of Mr. Justice Story — 
an able and accomplished judge, but one who has certainly never 
been suspected of a desire to curtail the legitimate authority of the 
Federal Government. In delivering the opinion of the court in 
the case of Martin vs. Hunter's lessee, he uses the following 
language: "Congress cannot vest any portion of the judicial 
power of the United States, except in courts ordained and estab- 
lished by itself." And again: "No part of the criminal juris- 
diction of the United States can, consistently with the constitu- 
tion, be delegated to State tribunals." I refer the gentleman 
from Virginia to the whole opinion, which he will find reported 
in I Wheaton, 323. Vide, also. Wheaton's Digest, 109. p. 103, 

% '5- '6. 

Such would be the inconvenience, and such the oppression, 
of having this new code of laws executed by the courts of the 
United States, that I declare most solemnly, I would not. by 
my vote, accept a road for the people of the district which I 
have the honor, in part, of representing, if its grant were sub- 
jected to such conditions, even if I believed we possessed the 
constitutional power to pass the bill. The free exercise of this 
power, which the Committee of Roads and Canals contemplate, 
would soon render the whole system of internal improvements 
odious. 

What necessity, I ask again, is there for the passage of this 
bill ? Cannot turnpike gates be as well established by the States 
through which this road passes? May not the provisions 
of this bill be as well enacted by the Legislatures of Maryland. 
Pennsylvania, and Virginia, as by the Congress of the United 
States? Why not ask them to do so? Should they refuse, it 
will then be time enough for Congress to adopt this doubtful and 
dangerous measure. " Ncc Dens intcrsit nisi nndiis rindice 
di^nus." No one doubts the power of the States: and whether 
the toll be collected and the road be preserved under State or 
United States authority, must be a matter of indifference to those 
interested. 



1829] SPEECH ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 405 

I confess, therefore, I was astonished to hear the gravity 
and solemnity with which the gentleman from New York [Mr. 
Storrs] treated this part of the subject. He says this is a most 
grave question. Ohio has a vested right in the road. We can- 
not, we dare not, transfer it to the States. He asks, shall we 
give away this road? I answer, by no means. No person ever 
thought of such a gift. The road is now going to ruin; and 
for the benefit of Ohio, we transfer a naked trust to the States 
through which it passes, on condition that they will keep it in 
repair. We consign this trust to the only persons who have 
the power of executing it with advantage for the benefit of Ohio 
and the other States. No beneficial interest will pass by this 
transfer. Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia will be trus- 
tees ; but with full power, according to the admission of all, to 
erect toll-gates, and keep the road in repair. By the amendment 
we leave it to be inferred, either that we have not the power 
ourselves to execute the trust, or that its exercise would be incon- 
venient; and we commit the road to the State Legislatures, where 
this power can be exercised in the most efficient and beneficial 
manner. We have already redeemed our pledge over and over 
again to Ohio. We have already appropriated to the construc- 
tion of this road far more than we were bound to do by our con- 
tract. But still I do not desire to stop at this point. I am 
willing to make appropriations to carry the road to the Missis- 
sippi, provided the States through which it may pass will agree to 
accept it when completed, and undertake to keep it in repair. 
Without this preliminary, for one I shall now stop: and I shall 
never vote another dollar, if toll-gates are to be erected under the 
authority of Congress. Here I take my stand on the doctrine 
of internal improvements. Thus far have I gone. I shall go 
no further. My last limit is th^ point where the power of 
appropriation ends, and jurisdiction commences. 

And now, sir, allow me to make a remark, in reply, on the 
subject of the precedents which have been cited by gentlemen. 
It might be sufficient for me to say, that no precedent exists to 
sustain the principle, and the only principle now in contest — the 
power to erect toll-gates. But I shall not rest satisfied here. 
The proceedings on the celebrated bill which passed both Houses 
of Congress in 1817, and which was returned by Mr. Madison 
with his objections, far from being an authority against the posi- 
tion for which I contend, is one decidedly in my favor. The 
bonus to be paid by the Bank of the United States for its char- 



406 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

ter, and the dividends upon our stock, were to be applied by this 
bill for constructing such roads and canals only, " in each State, 
as Congress, with the assent of such State, shall by law direct." 
Here the mere simple power of appropriation, and nothing more, 
was claimed; and that was to be exercised only with the assent 
of the States. Yet the bill was rejected by the President. Mr. 
Monroe having in the meantime become President, recommended, 
in his message at the commencement of the next session, an 
amendment to the constitution, granting to Congress the power 
over internal improvements. The subject was referred to a com- 
mittee of this House, and upon their report it was solemnly 
considered and debated. 

On the 13th of March, 1818, the three resolutions reported 
by the Committee of the Whole, affirming the power of Congress 
to construct roads and canals for military and commercial pur- 
poses, and for carrying the mail, were all negatived. And why? 
The reason must have been that the House did not believe we 
possessed the power of assuming jurisdiction for these purposes 
over the territory of the States. This is made manifest by the 
passage of the resolution, at the same time, which asserted an 
existing power in Congress to appropriate money for all these 
purposes. Thus it appears that the very distinction for which 
I am contending was adopted by this House in 1818. Here, 
then, is an authority directly in my favor. 

Afterwards, in 1822, when the bill passed both Houses for 
erecting toll-gates upon this road, it was rejected by the Presi- 
dent, and his objections were sustained by a majority of the 
House. It is true that, since that period, a bill similar to the 
one now before the committee has passed this House, after a 
resort to the previous question; but it was suffered to sleep 
in the Senate. Where, then, are the precedents of the gentle- 
men to sustain this measure? The weight of authority is clearly 
on the other side. 

I come now to notice some of the remarks of my colleague 
[Mr. Anderson] who first addressed the committee, which indi- 
cated a state of feeling towards myself I ought not to have ex- 
pected. He thought proper to say, (I wish to quote his very 
words,) " This is the first tune I have ever heard that the power 
to make roads, and the power to keep them in repair by erecting 
toll-gates, could be distinguished. Such a distinction appears 
to me to be absurd." The gentleman ought to know that this 
is not language to be used on this floor. When I was laboring 



1829] SPEECH ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 407 

to establish the distinction, a distinction which he could not doubt 
I sincerely believed to exist, he might have used a little more 
courtesy than to have denounced it as absurd. 

[Mr. Anderson here explained. He said he had not used 
the word " absurd." He had said it was the first time he had 
ever heard such a doctrine.] 

Where, then, said Mr. B., has the gentleman resided? In 
what benighted part of the world has been his abode? I have 
always understood there was as much intelligence and infor- 
mation in the vicinity of the gentleman, as in any other portion 
of the Union. Had he never heard that, seven years ago, the 
President of the United States had taken this very distinction, 
and maintained it in an argument of sixty pages, and that this 
House had yielded their assent to the distinction? Had he 
never heard that, since that period, humble as I am, upon all 
proper occasions, I have been endeavoring, upon this floor, to 
sustain and enforce the same distinction? Yet he has informed 
the House, this is the first time that he ever heard there was a 
distinction between the simple power of appropriating and ad- 
vancing money as a mere proprietor to construct or preser^'^e 
a road, and the assumption of jurisdiction over it as sovereign, 
within the dominion of the States, for the purpose of collecting 
tolls and keeping it in repair. No distinction between expending 
money, and the exercise of sovereign power. 

I admit that Congress had the power to apply the money in 
the public treasury to the construction of this road. What then 
follows? Merely that Congress possesses the power, if they 
think proper to exercise it, of applying money from the same 
source to keep it in repair. I have several times voted for such 
appropriations. But does it follow that we have the power to 
raise the tolls necessary for this purpose, by assuming a local 
jurisdiction over the soil of the States, never contemplated by 
the constitution ? 

But the gentleman thinks he has perceived in my amendment 
the nucleus of a system to distribute the surplus funds of the 
Union among the several States. I should have supposed that 
no colleague of mine would have seen a spectre in such a propo- 
sition, had it even been directly presented. Yet I can declare 
most solemnly that such an idea never once occurred to me in 
proposing the amendment. For this discover}^ I am indebted 
entirely to the superior penetration of the gentleman. I must 
remark, however, that I am beginning to adopt the belief, that 



408 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

this system, which has been recommended by one branch of the 
Legislature of Pennsylvania, is the best that can be devised. I 
am growing tired of the policy of seeing my own State exhaust- 
ing herself and taxing her citizens for the purpose of making 
internal improvements within her own limits, whilst the treasury 
of the United States, to which she contributes the one-seventh, 
is lavished in making similar improvements for the benefit of 
other States of the Union. The system prescribed by my col- 
league is the only one, I fear, under which we can expect justice 
to Pennsylvania. Besides, there is much cause to apprehend, 
from our own experience, that this system is the only one which 
will fix our attention upon the great objects of federal legislation 
intrusted to us by the constitution; instead of diverting it to 
the business of a court of quarter sessions and to the innu- 
merable petty and selfish details and understandings which must 
arise from the laying out and constructing roads and canals in 
every portion of the Union. I wish, however, to be distinctly 
understood that I have not finally made up my mind on this 
subject. 

I shall now settle my accounts with another colleague, [Mr. 
Stewart.] In discharging this duty, I shall have no occasion to 
notice any arguments he may have advanced bearing upon the 
question. His unprovoked attempts to be severe, at my expense, 
are my only reason and my only apology for detaining the com- 
mittee a few moments in adverting to his remarks. I had not 
even anticipated his opposition to the amendment. 

The gentleman has thought fit to express his regret that 
" I had recently become a convert to State rights and an enemy 
to this road, considering that as the democratic course." Now, 
sir, what ought I to think of any gentleman upon this floor, and 
especially a colleague, who, with a full knowledge of all the facts, 
could utter such an expression? He knew perfectly well, that 
so long ago as February, 1823, I moved an amendment similar 
to that now before the committee, and have been pursuing it ever 
since, under every aspect which the political horizon has assumed. 
My change of opinion on this subject, and the reasons for it, 
were frankly avowed six years ago upon this floor, long before 
even suspicion herself could have attributed it to any improper 
motive. Even the gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. Buckner,] 
though occasionally somewhat severe, has congratulated me for 
having changed my opinion at so early a period, and escaped 
in good time. Yet the gentleman from Pennsylvania has harped 



1829] SPEECH ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 409 

upon what he calls my recent conversion, and has affected to 
consider it as strange and unaccountable. 

The gentleman commenced his remarks by declaring that he 
was not in favor of all roads and canals. He said there were 
township roads, county roads. State roads, and United States 
roads ; that the power of the General Government only extended 
to the construction of the latter. But how shall we ascertain 
what are these roads? The gentleman has favored us with a 
compendious rule. Each member, he says, ought to ask himself, 
is this road or canal necessary for commerce, for war, or for 
carrying the mail? If so, Congress have the power to construct 
it. What, then, is the gentleman's limit? According to his 
notions, we possess the power of constructing all roads on which 
the mail must be carried, all roads and canals over which troops 
or militar}^ stores must pass, and all roads and canals necessary 
for conducting the commerce between the several States. And 
over all these we may extend our jurisdiction and collect tolls, 
according to the constitutional creed of the gentleman. And yet 
he talks about limitations to federal power! The gentleman's 
constitutional notions are truly a strange medley. He will 
never be accused, as my friends from Virginia have been, of 
drawing nice distinctions and refining too much on abstract ques- 
tions. I will warrant him against this danger. It will never 
be his fate, as it was that of Burke, " to cut blocks with a razor." 
I recollect a constitutional scruple of the gentleman's, some years 
ago, which astonished the House. It would have been highly 
amusing, had it not been made at the expense of humanity. We 
had, by treaty, deprived the Florida Indians of their best lands. 
They were starving in the swamps we had left them. They 
came here, not asking their lands to be restored, but begging for 
bread to preserve their lives. The strong case which they pre- 
sented, and their extreme misery, excited sympathy in every heart. 
In the midst of this feeling, the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
rose, and made a constitutional argument to prove that Congress 
had no power to give bread to these starving Indians. The gen- 
tleman, truly, on constitutional questions, strains at a gnat and 
swallows a camel. 

The gentleman's guards against infractions of the constitu- 
tion are the Supreme Court and the ballot box. These are both 
excellent in their kind, though different in their mode of opera- 
tion. The one destroys the law, the other the law-maker. It is 
often difficult, however, to know the precise point decided by the 



410 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

ballot boxes. Whether the gentleman's constituents have decided 
against him, because he thought it unconstitutional to save the 
Florida Indians from stan^ation, or because he thought it con- 
stitutional to erect toll-gates upon the Cumberland road, I shall 
not pretend to determine. It is very certain the " great repub- 
lican party," about whom we have heard so much in this debate, 
could have no agency in his defeat. In the canvass, he pledged 
himself that if elected he would attribute the glory of his success 
to the Jackson men. I can never believe they possessed so little 
magnanimity as to resist such a feeling appeal. 

But, after all, how was I astonished to hear the gentleman 
conclude his remarks with the following sentences : "I am bound 
in candor to admit, that the power to erect toll-gates is not so 
clear as the power to construct this road. I am not very solici- 
tous whether the road is preserved by the United States or the 
States. I hope the bill will pass either in the one shape or the 
other; and whichever shape it may be put I will give it my vote." 
I quote his very words, because they were so remarkable that I 
took them down at the moment, and I find the National Journal 
has reported them nearly in the same language. To what a lame 
and impotent conclusion does the gentleman arrive after all his 
premises? Who could ever have supposed, until he announced it 
himself, that it was a matter of indifference to him whether this 
road should be ceded to the States or not ? After such a conclu- 
sion, well might the chairman of the Committee of Roads and 
Canals [Mr. Mercer] accuse him of defection. Yet I have been 
denounced as a most pestiferous democrat, as possessing the zeal 
of a recent convert, for proposing an amendment in favor of 
which the gentleman himself will vote, should it be engrafted 
on the bill by the committee. The course of the gentleman 
towards me has been very unkind, and nothing but the justice 
which I owed to myself could have compelled me to make these 
remarks. 

I now approach the gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. Buck- 
ner.] His arrows, although they were sharp, were not malig- 
nant ; whilst his argument was ingenious. In the course of my 
remarks I shall take care to speak of him with nothing more than 
retributive justice. 

The gentleman commenced his observation by quoting a 
saying of some celebrated, though to me unknown member of the 
British Parliament, who had declared that whenever " he heard 
the mention made of the people's rights, he was prepared for 



1829] SPEECH ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 411 

the desolating doctrines of anarchy and confusion, and he all at 
once became alarmed for the safety of the throne and the con- 
stitution." And has it come to this? Are the representatives 
of the American people to be denounced for asserting- their rights 
and those of the States upon this floor? If these rights are 
not to be asserted here, before what other earthly tribunal shall 
they be proclaimed and enforced? I am sorry that the gentleman 
took this text from a British statesman whose name he has 
not thought proper to mention; and I am still more sorry that 
the greater part of his argument seemed to proceed upon the 
principle that this text might be true. 

The gentleman then proceeded to attack the position which 
I had maintained, that incidental power must, from its nature, 
be subordinate; that it could not transcend the power which 
called it into existence. The present President of the United 
States, [Mr. Adams,] an authority which the gentleman will 
respect, has laid it down, that the means must be subordinate 
to the end. This principle is at the very root of any just con- 
struction of the constitution. And yet the gentleman though 
he would not say this w^as " unintelligible jargon," left it to be 
inferred. Now I shall assert that no greater political absurdity 
can exist, than a Government confined to enumerated objects 
of power by a written constitution, and yet at liberty to 
assume other distinct and independent powers of a character 
more formidable than those delegated, for the pretended pur- 
pose of carrying them into effect. A Government restricted 
as to its ends, but wholly unlimited in regard to its means! 
Imagination cannot present a stronger case to illustrate my 
position than the one now before the committee. This Gov- 
ernment is expressly restricted from acquiring any jurisdiction 
within the States, except over small portions of territory abso- 
lutely necessary for the defence of the country; and even this 
cannot be acquired without the consent of the States; and yet 
gentlemen now claim, as a mere incident to the power of appro- 
priation for internal improvements, jurisdiction over a road 
which will extend from Cumberland to the Mississippi. Al- 
though you cannot directly acquire jurisdiction over any por- 
tion of the territory of the States, except for the purposes 
of war, you may indirectly assume jurisdiction over all the 
post-roads and canals in the country. Such a principle would 
be subversive of all limitations to federal power. It would 
render all the wholesome restraints of the system nugatory. 



412 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

Tlie true principle is, that although the means may be varied, 
with the ever-varying changes of society, they must still be 
subordinate to the end. But I sliall not say that the gentle- 
man's argument in favor of a contrary position was " unintelli- 
gible jargon." 

In passing, I would just observe, that the doctrine on the 
subject of internal improvements, seems to have undergone a 
great change in Maryland within the last thirty years. In 1802, 
the Legislature of that State thought it necessary to pass an 
act, authorizing the General Government to repair the post- 
roads within its territory. Now the same State voluntarily 
yields to Congress jurisdiction over all that portion of the 
Cumberland road within its limits. It is thus we are depart- 
ing from original principles and a strict construction of federal 
power. 

The gentleman believes there will be no danger of any 
collision between the Federal and State authorities, should they 
both exercise the sovereign power of constructing roads and 
canals. But what has the history of the last year taught us 
upon this subject? If we had undertaken to construct the 
Chesapeake and Ohio canal by our own authority, the United 
States would, at this very moment, have been in collision with 
the State of Maryland. This canal and the Baltimore railroad 
are now contesting which of them is entitled to the choice of 
locution ^ along the Potomac. And here permit me to observe, 
that the railroad, which we have not patronized, is, in my 
opinion, a much more national and a much more practicable 
undertaking than the canal, which we have taken under our 
fostering care. The railroad may extend to the Ohio ; but 
the canal can never proceed beyond the coal mines near Cum- 
berland. Gentlemen cannot, I think, seriously suppose that 
the Allegheny mountain is ever to be passed over by locks, 
or passed through by tunnels. 

I might mention another case in illustration. The Legis- 
lature of Pennsylvania have refused to permit a railroad to 
be made from Baltimore to the Susquehannah. It would have 
required powerful reasons to have induced me to vote in this 
manner ; but still the Legislature have thus determined. Now, 
suppose the power of this Government unquestionable to enter 
the territory of the States and to construct roads; ought it 



' So in the original print, but evidently a mistake for " location." 



1829] SPEECH ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 413 

ever to be exercised without their consent? ^^^oul(l it not 
necessarily produce colHsions? Compared with many of the 
projects which have been submitted to us l)y the Committee 
of Roads and Canals, this railroad is eminently national. It 
has become the fashion upon this floor to call the State of 
Pennsylvania unostentatious; but yet she will always be found 
sternly maintaining her rights. Let the gentleman from Vir- 
ginia, [Mr. Mercer,] with all the powers of the Federal Gov- 
ernment, attempt to construct this railroad through her terri- 
tory, in opposition to her real or supposed interest, and the 
consequences, if nothing more, might at least be fatal to his 
whole system. Adopt the policy of the amendment, and you 
then have no collisions to fear. 

But the gentleman has given still stronger evidence of his 
devotion to federal power than any which I have yet cited. 
He declared that he did not know what I meant by a whole- 
some jealousy of this power, and disapproved even of the use 
of such terms. And is this a doctrine proper to be advanced 
in the American Congress? Are we to disregard the history 
of all the free Governments which have ever existed? Are we 
to set at naught the political maxim of the friends of civil 
liberty in every age, that jealousy on the part of the people 
has ever been the condition on which liberty can be enjoyed? 
It is the nature of man to grasp at power, and this principle 
is not changed in a republic. A wholesome jealousy of our 
rulers is the very palladium of our safety. Remove this, and 
all is gone. In this republic, founded, administered, and de- 
fended by popular jealousy, I never expected to hear a gentle- 
man so respectable avow that the very phrase was grating to his 
ears. 

The gentleman has been pleased to compare my conversion 
to that of the Apostle Paul. I can assure him it was neither 
sudden nor miraculous. It took place in 1822, before the age 
of political miracles had commenced, and was the result of 
Mr. Monroe's long and able message on the subject, and the 
reflections to which that document gave birth. The gentleman 
from Kentucky is so much devoted to his high-toned notions 
of federal power, that I fear a miracle would scarce save him. 
Like the companions of the Apostle, he might be confounded 
by the light which shone around him. but not converted to the 
truth. The gentleman has been quite scriptural in his allu- 
sions. He has congratulated me on my escape in good time 



414 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

from the wrath to come, and that I am now a member of the 
great repiibHcan party. In return for his congratulation, I 
must express my regret that he is yet in the gall of bitterness, 
and in the bond of iniquity. I should help him if I could, 
but I fear his case is hopeless. He has recently almost escaped 
to a judicial station; and as this would have been a great 
temporal deliverance, I should have rejoiced had he been more 
successful. 

The gentleman has said that he understood I had at one 
time belonged to the federal party, which he complimented by 
calling it an independent class of men. His information has 
been correct. I trust I shall never blush to have been attached 
to that party, of which the father of his country was the head. 
I take pride, however, in declaring that I was a Washington 
federalist, and, when my country was in danger, I had no 
constitutional or other scruples about the propriety of defend- 
ing it against a foreign foe. The gentleman says I have hith- 
erto always acted with independence; if he means to insinuate 
that this will not be my course hereafter, he is greatly mis- 
taken. Thank God, I am as independent as I ever was. I 
hope nothing and fear nothing from any administration. I 
am neither a petitioner nor an expectant. I shall continue to 
support the great republican family, as the gentleman calls it, 
so long as it shall continue true to its principles ; and I have no 
objection to be called a democrat. But if the gentleman sup- 
poses that for any office, of which, humble as I am, I might be 
thought worthy, I would decline to serve out the term for 
which I have been recently elected, and abandon constituents 
who have sustained me amidst difficulties and dangers of no 
ordinary character, I can assure him that he does me great 
injustice. 

I have alwavs heard that the orentleman himself was for- 
merly a federalist. It is true that he and I have taken very 
different roads since the dissolution of the old parties ; but yet, 
on account of the memory of the olden time, if for nothing else, 
I think he might have spared some of his personal remarks. 
But let us part in peace. I desire nothing else. 

I shall neither undertake to defend the editor of the Tele- 
graph, nor the Committee on Retrenchment, against the attack 
of the gentleman. If there be any man alive who is capable 
of defending himself, it is that editor. I am neither his advo- 
cate nor defender. As to the Committee on Retrenchment, 



18^9] SPEECH ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 415 

I shall exercise the same forbearance. They have, I fear, intro- 
duced many bills which will never pass. To some of their meas- 
ures I am decidedly opposed, but still they deserve the thanks 
of the House and of the country. If they have gone too far 
in the cause of reform, it is a rare error in these days. 

I was not a little astonished that the gentleman should have 
found fault with me for paying a passing tribute of respect to 
the State of Virginia. As a citizen of the United States, have 
I not a right to feel proud of that State? Has she not pro- 
duced men who had a distinguished agency both in forming 
the federal constitution, and maintaining its principles in 
peace and in war? Notwithstanding my feelings of respect, 
I am no indiscriminate eulogist of Virginian policy. I believe, 
if a portion of the ability and eloquence which her distinguished 
sons have displayed in constitutional disquisitions had been 
employed in sustaining the wise measures, and in combating the 
false policy, which have been proposed in Congress, their labors 
would have been more useful to the country. Still, I am sur- 
prised that an obscure individual, like myself, should have been 
so severely criticised for expressing a favorable opinion of 
that ancient and distinguished commonwealth. HI were to 
remove to-morrow from my native State, it is probable, from the 
similarity of our institutions, our policy, and our laws, I should 
select the State of Ohio for my residence — that very State whose 
compact with the United States I have been attempting, in the 
opinion of gentlemen, to violate. 

It has been strongly insinuated, that to deliver this road 
to Pennsylvania would be to commit the lamb to the wolf. I 
shall not condescend to answer such insinuations. The road 
passes ninety miles through our territory. It accommodates 
three populous and wealthy counties; and yet it is supposed 
we might abandon it to ruin. When was Pennsylvania ever 
known to neglect the interest of her own citizens, or the obli- 
gations of her own honor? 

The gentleman himself, after admitting that the tribunals 
of the States could not be used by this Government for the pur- 
pose of enforcing its system of policy along the road, declares 
that the argument against the bill of the most weight is, the 
difficulty of establishing tribunals for this purpose. He sug- 
gests the appointment of twenty-five justices of the peace, which 
he thinks would be sufficient between Cumberland and Wheel- 
ing. But superior judicial officers would become necessary; 



416 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

for the gentleman surely does not intend that the summary con- 
victions and other proceedings of the justices of the peace, with- 
out the aid of a jury, should, in all cases, be final. It is thus that 
power goes stealing on from one encroachment to another. I have 
not the time, nor would the committee have the patience, to enable 
me to pursue this branch of the subject. I will merely ask any 
gentleman acquainted with the principles upon which the con- 
stitution was founded, if he can believe its framers ever intended 
to introduce United States' justices of the peace, throughout 
the different States, for the purpose of exercising jurisdiction 
over the canals and highways of the country? Would not such 
an exercise of power be equally at war with all its general 
provisions, and with all sound policy? 

Before I conclude I wish again to direct the particular 
attention of the chairman of the Committee on Roads and 
Canals to an argument of mine, which has not been answered, 
which there has not even been an attempt to answer, through- 
out the whole course of the debate. There has been much in- 
genious play around it, but it has not once been fairly met. Let 
it be granted, for the sake of the argument, that under the power 
to establish post offices and post roads, you can exercise the 
sovereign power of constructing such roads throughout the 
States. What would then be the sole purpose of this power? 
To enable you to transport the mail over these roads, once a 
day, or once a week. It would be a right of passage, for the 
single object. The power that you have is spent, when the 
mail is safely carried. But can this authority, to be exercised 
simply for the transportation of the mail, transfer to you, by 
implication, the sovereign power of closing up these roads by 
the erection of toll-gates, and taking them under your own 
exclusive jurisdiction? Can a power granted for a single pur- 
pose give you an unlimited control? Can it authorize you to 
regulate the use of these roads, by the citizens of the States, 
for all other purposes? This is the question to which I demand 
an answer. The principle is still worse as applied to military 
roads. Are you, because it may be necessary that troops or 
munitions of war may pass over a road once a year, or once in 
seven years, to take exclusive possession of this road? A simi- 
lar question might be asked, in regard to roads or canals used 
for the purpose of conducting the commerce between different 
States. The gentleman from Kentucky has made the most 
argumentative speech upon this subject, and has cited several 



1829] SPEECH ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD 417 

cases in illustration of his argument. I shall allude merely 
to the strongest. He says that Congress have passed a law im- 
posing a penalty on any ferryman who neglects or refuses to 
carry the mail over a river. Granted. It is right. It is proper. 
The Federal Government alone possess the sovereign power of 
carrying the mail, and, as a necessary consequence, of removing 
all obstructions to its passage. But does it follow, because they 
have exercised the power of punishing a ferryman for violating 
his duty in this single case, that therefore they may take the 
ferry itself under their exclusive jurisdiction, prescribe the tolls 
for its passage, and punish, in the courts of the United States, 
all the citizens of the country who may violate the regulations 
imposed by their laws? All the other examples of the gentle- 
man are of a similar character, and require no particular answer. 
They are cases of the exercise of power absolutely necessary 
to carry the enumerated powers of the constitution into effect, 
and do not, in a single instance, transcend the specific purpose 
for which they were intended. 

Some objections have been made to the form of the amend- 
ment which I have presented. They will be best answered by 
asking it simply to be read. It was prepared with great care, 
and after much consultation. So far from purporting to affirm 
the power of this Government to erect toll-gates and to transfer 
our authority to the States, as has been alleged by one gentle- 
man, it even avoids an allegation that we have any right of prop- 
erty in the road. This caution was used to keep clear of the 
scruples of those gentlemen who deny to Congress the right 
of appropriation. It merely transfers to the States " any right 
of property or claim " which the United States may have, pro- 
vided they will accept it, whatever it may be, and keep the 
road in repair by the collection of tolls. 

I am anxious the question should now be taken. I have 
been urging it ever since 1823. Let it now be decided. I shall 
submit with deference to the decision of the committee, whatever 
it may be. At the same time I must express my conviction, 
that should Congress adopt the policy of this bill, it will alarm 
the people of the States, and, in the end, destroy that system 
of internal improvements which the Committee on Roads and 
Canals are so anxious to cherish. It will be the best argument 
that has ever been used in favor of the distribution of the 
surplus funds of this Government among the States. 



418 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

REMARKS, MARCH 2, 1829, 

ON THE CUMBERLAND ROAD.' 

Mr. Buchanan having offered an amendment proposing to 
invest the President of the United States with power to make an 
arrangement with the States of Pennsylvania, Maryland, and 
Virginia, for the erection of gates and collection of toll, 

^t ^If ^f *if fc^ xi^ %i^ ^i^ ^i' ^i^ 

Mr. Washington now demanded the previous question. 

A conversation now ensued, as to the effect of the previous 
question under these circumstances, between Messrs. P. P. Bar- 
bour, Buchanan, Mercer, and Gorham ; when 

Mr. Buchanan claimed the floor, as having been improperly 
deprived of it when the previous question was demanded. 

The Speaker apprehending that an error had inadvertently 
happened, decided that the gentleman from Pennsylvania should 
proceed. 

Mr, Buchanan then said, he felt as friendly as any gentle- 
man in the House to the appropriation of money for the exten- 
sion of the Cumberland road to the Mississippi. He would 
state the single reason why he felt himself compelled — he would 
say reluctantly compelled — to vote against this bill. The House 
had recently determined that they would keep the Cumberland 
road in repair by erecting toll-gates upon it, under the authority 
of the Federal Government. As long as the pretension con- 
tinued to be set up, which he believed to be both dangerous and 
unconstitutional, he could not, nor would not, vote for the con- 
struction of any road intended, after its completion, to be thus 
placed under the jurisdiction of the United States. 



REMARKS, DECEMBER 7, 1829, 

ON THE ELECTION OF A CLERK OF THE HOUSE.2 

Mr. Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, said he trusted that such 
a course would be pursued as that the House should at once 
go into an election by ballot. And perhaps his colleague was 
wrong in now proposing a different course. It had been the 
practice, Mr. B. knew, where no opposition to the old clerk was 
intended, to re-appoint him by resolution. The gentleman from 

' Register of Debates, 20 Cong. 2 Sess. 1828-1829, V. 385, 386. 

" Register of Debates, 21 Cong, i Sess. 1829-1830, VI., part i, p. 471. 



1829] STANDING COMMITTEES 419 

Kentucky, however, had stated that he believed that there were 
other candidates for the office. Mr. B. said he did not know the 
fact : but, if there were, the proper course was, as usual in such 
case, to proceed to ballot for a clerk. He should, himself, vote 
to lay the resolution on the table, and then to proceed to an 
election by ballot. 



REMARKS, DECEMBER 9, 1829, 

ON THE APPOINTMENT OF STANDING COMMITTEES.' 

Mr. Buchanan said that there was, he believed, an unusual 
number of new members in the present House of Representa- 
tives ; and it was desirable, certainly, that the Speaker, who was 
to appoint these committees, should have time and opportunity 
for inquiry before he appointed them. It was not probable, 
he said, that any legislative business would be done in the course 
of the present week, and for that reason he moved that the motion 
lie upon the table, to give the Speaker a better opportunity of 
becoming acquainted with the new members, &c. 

Mr. Cambreleng suggested to Mr. Condict the expediency 
of withdrawing his motion for the present, and renewing it 
to-morrow or another day. 

Mr. Condict said, the practice heretofore had been to adopt 
a similar order before the message was considered; and, as the 
committees were not announced until the reading of the Journal 
on the day following the adoption of the order, a whole day 
was thus given to the Speaker for the selection of the committees. 

The Speaker said, that it had been the practice, at the 
opening of a new Congress, to allow the Speaker three or four 
days for the selection of the committees. 

Mr. Buchanan said, he should not have moved to postpone 
the motion for now appointing them, if he had not known that 
to be the fact. 

Mr. Mallary said, that, should the order be now made, 
it would, he presumed, not necessarily follow that the committees 
should be announced to-morrow. 

The Speaker said, that, if the order was now made, the 
committees must be announced to-morrow. 

Mr. Buchanan said, if the pending motion was laid upon the 
table until to-morrow, and should then be adopted, the House 



^ Register of Debates, 2i Cong, i Sess. 1829-1830, VI., part i, p. 47a 



420 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

might then, following precedent, adjourn over to Monday, and 
thus afford the Speaker the requisite time of three or four days 
for a selection of the committees. 



REMARKS, DECEMBER 15, 1829, 

ON THE PRINTING OF THE ANNUAL REPORT OF THE 
SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY. i 

The Speaker laid before the House a letter from the Secre- 
tary of the Treasury, transmitting his annual report upon the 
state of the finances. 

The report having been announced from the Chair, 

Mr. Buchanan moved that ten thousand copies of the re- 
port, and the documents accompanying it, be printed. 

Mr. Whittlesey proposed six thousand copies, being the 
largest number ever printed of a public document before this 
session. 

Mr. Buchanan said that the Annual Report from the Treas- 
ury Department was always looked to with great interest by 
the people ; that it was too voluminous to find admission at large 
into the newspapers; that its general circulation was very desir- 
able, &c. Ten thousand copies had been ordered to be printed 
of the documents accompanying the message of the President; 
and this document, he presumed, would be considered of at least 
equal importance. 

j|C 5{C SjC SjC ^ 3p 3p 3(C •{» 5(C 

Mr. Buchanan said, he was happy to find that the gentleman 
from Ohio was now so decided an advocate for retrenchment; 
not knowing, however, that he had ever found him otherwise. 
He did not know but, in pursuit of this object, he and the gentle- 
man from Ohio would be found going hand in hand. But this 
[Mr. B. said] was not the point at which they ought to begin 
to retrench. Retrenchment ought not to begin with communi- 
cation of information of this sort to the people, who are more 
interested in knowing exactly what has been the management of 
their financial concerns, than, perhaps, in any other subject. 
If we are to begin the work, [said Mr. B.] let it be with some- 
thing else, more in accordance with the proper principles of 
retrenchment than this. 

The question was then taken on printing the largest number 
proposed, ten thousand copies, and decided in the affirmative. 



' Register of Debates, 2i Cong, i Sess. 1829-1830, VI., part i, p. 475- 



1829] PROCEEDS OF LAND SALES 421 

REMARKS, DECEMBER 30, 1829, 

ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE PROCEEDS OF THE 
SALE OF PUBLIC LANDS.' 

Mr. Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, asked the gentleman from 
Tennessee to withdraw this motion, (which by rule admits of 
no debate,) to allow him to make a few observations. 

Mr. Polk said he would accommodate the gentleman with 
a great deal of pleasure, but the very object of his motion was 
to stop the debate. 

The question on the motion of Mr. Polk to lay the resolu- 
tion on the table, was then taken by yeas and nays, and was 
decided as follows — yeas 72, nays 95. 

So the House refused to lay the resolution on the table. 

Mr. Buchanan then rose, and said, he felt himself indebted 
to the vote of the House, and not to the courtesy of the gentle- 
man from Tennessee, [Mr. Polk] for the privilege of making 
a few observations on this subject. He ought not perhaps to 
complain of that gentleman's course, because it was sanctioned 
by the rules of the House; yet he would say, it was not very, 
liberal, after a member had himself addressed the House upon 
a question, to conclude his remarks by making a motion, which, 
if successful, would prevent all others from making any reply 
to his argument. 

The House [said Mr. B.] is placed in a singular position 
in regard to this resolution. The course pursued by its friends 
has been unfortunate. Upon this resolution, which merely pro- 
poses to institute an inquiry before a committee of the House, 
the skilful tactics of the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. 
Martin] have involved us in such a debate, as can only become 
proper in case the committee should report a bill for the division 
of the nett proceeds of the public lands among the States in 
proportion to their population, and that bill should be before the 
House for discussion. Yet, in this preliminary stage of the 
business, we have been drawn off from the main subject of in- 
quiry, and have been seriously engaged in discussing the ques- 

' Register of Debates, 21 Cong, i Sess. 1829-1830, VI., part i, pp. 489- 
490. The debate was on a resolution to direct the Committee on the Public 
Lands to inquire into the expediency of distributing the net proceeds of the 
sales of public lands among the several States for the purposes of education 
and internal improvement. Mr. Polk, after some remarks, moved to lay the 
resolution on the table. 



422 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1829 

tion, whether the new States, who have hitherto received dona- 
tions of pubhc land from this Government, shall account for 
them in the general distribution. The gentleman from South 
Carolina, who proposed this amendment, has frankly avowed, 
that, whether it prevailed or not, he would vote against the 
resolution. Such is my regard for that gentleman, and of 
such value do I estimate his support, that I might be willing to 
sacrifice something of my own opinion to secure it; but when 
he proposes to amend our resolution, and informs us, at the same 
time, he will oppose it in every shape, we ought to view his 
amendment with jealousy and distrust. 

" Timeo Danaos, et dona ferentes." 

Without being drawn into an argument upon the subject, 
it is my decided opinion that it would be both unjust and ungen- 
erous to charge the new States with donations of land which 
they have already received, and that an inquiry into the expedi- 
ency of such a measure could only tend to distract and divide 
the friends of the resolution. 

What [said Mr. B.] is the true and the only proper ques- 
tion for discussion at this time? It is, whether the subject of the 
resolution is of sufficient importance to demand inquiry. Upon 
this question can a doubt be entertained? The vast importance 
of the measure proposed must be impressed upon every mind, 
whether we regard its consequences to the people of the old 
or of the new States of this Union. The public feeling of the 
country is alive to the subject. And shall such of us as are 
friendly to its thorough investigation suffer inquiry to be stifled? 
I trust not. 

The report of the select committee of the House, at the last 
session of Congress, has furnished us all the statistical informa- 
tion upon the subject which can be desired. There are two 
important questions which that report does not embrace, and 
which ought to be carefully investigated by a committee of this 
House. I desire to have a report from such a committee, upon 
the question whether the proceeds of the public lands are pledged 
in such a manner to the public creditors, that, without violating 
our faith, we cannot distribute them among the States until after 
the total extinguishment of the national debt. In the course 
of the debate, the affirmative of this proposition has been stated 
with a degree of confidence which would almost seem to pre- 
clude doubt; and yet there are probably strong reasons to sus- 
tain a contrary opinion. 



1829] PROCEEDS OF LAND SALES 423 

It is very true, that, when the funding system was first 
established in 1790, the proceeds of the sales of the public lands 
were directed to be applied solely to the extinguishment of the 
debt of the Revolution ; but it is equally certain that this pledge 
was often disregarded. In the year 181 7, when the present 
sinking fund was established, all previous laws which had made 
appropriations for the purchase or payment of the funded debt 
were repealed. That fund of ten millions of dollars annually, 
for the discharge of the public debt, was to be raised from the 
import and tonnage duties, from the internal duties, and from 
the sales of Western lands. It may be [said Mr. B.] that the 
obligation imposed by this act will be equally satisfied, whether 
the annual sinking fund shall be provided from one or from all 
these sources. Such was probably the opinion of Congress, 
when, in less than one year after they had created this fund, 
they abolished all the internal duties, and thus cut off one of 
the sources from which it was to be supplied. I wish to express 
no decided opinion upon this question; but it is certainly well 
worthy of investigation by a committee. Its proper under- 
standing and correct decision may aid us much in arriving at 
a just conclusion in regard to the main question. 

Mr. B. wished to be distinctly understood, that even if we 
could, consistently with the public faith, at once distribute the 
annual proceeds of the public lands among the States, he had 
not for himself determined whether it would be expedient to do 
so until after the national debt should be discharged. 

There is [said Mr. B.] another important question involved 
in this inquiry, on which I desire to have the report of a com- 
mittee; and that is in regard to the constitutional power of 
Congress to make the proposed distribution among the States. 
The power to distribute the proceeds of the public lands among 
the States to which they now belong, is, in my opinion, very dif- 
ferent from that of distributing among them the surplus revenue 
arising from taxation. I purposely refrain from entering upon 
the discussion of this question at present; but I think I might 
appeal with confidence to the gentleman from South ^ Caro- 
lina, [Mr. Martin] whether there is not an obvious distinction 
between the two cases. A gentleman might, with perfect con- 
sistency, admit the power of Congress in the one case, and deny 

it in the other. 

Mr. B. said he thought this resolution ought not to be 
referred to the Committee on the Public Lands, as the mover 



424 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [18!29 

of it [Mr. Hunt] had proposed. Highly as he respected that 
committee, it was well known they were chiefly selected from 
the members representing that portion of the Union within which 
the public lands were situated, and who were therefore best 
acquainted with the laws which related to them. The subject 
proposed to be referred was one of deep and general interest 
to every State. In his opinion, a select committee, composed 
of members from different portions of the Union, should be 
raised for the purpose of investigating it. The subject involved 
important questions in regard to the construction of the con- 
stitution and of the laws of the country, which did not appro- 
priately refer themselves to the Committee on the Public Lands; 
and the information peculiarly within the province of that com- 
mittee, we have already received from the report of the select 
committee raised at the last session. 

Mr. B, said he thought the present the peculiar and the 
appropriate time for inquiry. The country were expecting, nay, 
they were demanding it. Are we prepared to stifle this inquiry? 
Are we prepared to declare that we do not think this important 
subject even worthy of a reference? Such, he trusted, would 
never be the determination of the House ; and he was convinced 
the friends of inquiry w^ould never be diverted from their pur- 
pose, until they had obtained all the information necessary to 
enable them to act with wisdom. 

Mr. B. said he would read a substitute for the resolution 
proposed by the gentleman from Vermont. [Mr. Hunt] which 
was in accordance with the remarks he had just made. He 
trusted it would be acceptable to that gentleman. He knew that, 
under the rules of the House, he could not at present offer it 
as an amendment; and if he could, he would not, because his 
time was already too much occupied on the committee of which 
he was already a member, to make him desire to be placed on the 
select committee to which this subject ought in his opinion to be 
referred. 

Here Mr. B. concluded by reading the following: 

Resolved, That a select committee be appointed, to which shall be 
referred the report of a select committee made to the House of Representa- 
tives the 25th February last, relating to the distribution of the nett proceeds 
of the sale of public lands among the several States, in proportion to the 
population of each ; and that the said committee be instructed to inquire, and 
report to this House, whether there be any provision of the constitution, or 
of any act or acts of Congress, in relation to the discharge of the public 
debt, which ought to prevent Congress from making such distribution, and 
that the said committee have leave to report by bill or otherwise. 



1830] ALLOWANCES TO JURORS 425 

1830. 
REPORT, JANUARY 4, 1830, 

ON THE CASE OF JAMES LINSEY.' 

January 4, 1830, Mr. Buchanan, from the Committee on 
the Judiciary, made to the House the following report : 

The Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the 
petition of James Linsey, report: 

That at the last session of Congress, the Committee on the 
Judiciary made a report against the claim of the petitioner. 
His petition and documents have been again presented, and the 
Committee have again examined them, and, without entering 
into particulars, they are of opinion that the claim is wholly 
without foundation : if allowed, it could only be upon the mon- 
strous principle, that the United States, by selling the lands of 
an individual, for the payment of his direct tax, became a war- 
rantor to the purchaser, and his heirs and assigns, for the valid- 
ity of the title. The committee, therefore, offer the following 
Resolution : 

Resolved, That the prayer of the petitioner ought not to be granted. 



REPORT, JANUARY 4, 1830, 

ON ALLOWANCES TO JURORS.^ 

January 4, 1830, Mr. Buchanan, from the Committee on 
the Judiciary, submitted to the House the following report : 

The Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred 
a resolution of the House, instructing them to inquire into the 
expediency of increasing the allowance for travel and attendance 
of the jurors of the Circuit and District Courts of the United 
States, report the following 

RESOLUTION : 
Resolved, That it is not expedient to make the provision proposed in the 
foregoing resolution. 

' House Reports, No. 48, 21 Cong, i Sess. 
^^ House Reports, No. 49, 21 Cong, i Sess. 



426 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1830 

REPORT, JANUARY 4, 1830, 

ON APPEALS AND WRITS OF ERROR.' 

January 4, 1830, Mr. Buchanan presented to the House 
the following report : 

The Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred a 
resolution of the House, instructing them to inquire into the 
expediency of providing by law, that all Appeals, and Writs 
of Error, from the Southern Judicial District, in Florida, in 
Admiralty and Maritime cases, shall be taken and prosecuted 
from said Court, directly to the Supreme Court of the United 
States, report: 

That the Appellate Court, for the Southern Judicial District 
of Florida, is composed of the Judges of the three Judicial Dis- 
tricts, into which that Territory was divided, by the act of the 
26th May, 1824. From the decisions of this Appellate Court, 
writs of error and appeals may be taken to the Supreme Court 
of the United States, if the amount in controversy exceed one 
thousand dollars. The committee cannot perceive any ade- 
quate reason for changing this provision, and allowing a direct 
appeal in Admiralty and Maritime cases, from the Court for the 
Southern Judicial District of Florida, to the Supreme Court of 
the United States. 

It is true, that many causes of admiralty and maritime juris- 
diction, and some of these of large amount, are decided by the 
Courts of the Southern District of Florida ; but if this were a 
sufficient reason for allowing an immediate appeal from that 
Court, to the Supreme Court, it would apply with equal force to 
cases of a similar nature, decided by the District Courts of the 
United States ; from whose decrees, in such causes, an appeal 
is now allowed, in the first instance, to the Circuit Courts. If 
the law were thus changed, the consequence would be a great 
increase of the business of the Supreme Court, which is already 
so onerous that it can scarcely be transacted, without interfering 
with the terms of the Circuit Courts. Your committee therefore 
recommend the following resolution : 

Resolved, That it is inexpedient to provide by law that all Appeals and 
Writs of Error from the Southern Judicial District, in Florida, in Admiralty 
and Maritime cases, shall be taken and prosecuted from said Court, directly 
to the Supreme Court of the United States. 



' House Reports, No. 50, 21 Cong, i Sess. 



1830] CASE OF MANUEL DEL BARCO 427 

REPORT, JANUARY 4, 1830, 

ON THE CASE OF MANUEL DEL BARCO.' 

January 4, 1830, Mr. Buchanan presented to the House the 
following report: 

The Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred 
the memorial of Manuel del Barco, report: 

That the memorialist represents himself to be a resident 
of Pensacola, and to have become a citizen of the United States, 
by the cession of Florida. That, on the invasion or occupation 
of Pensacola by the British forces, in the year 1814, a negro man 
slave, named Henry, then about fourteen years of age, was car- 
ried off to the Appalachicola, thence went among the Creek 
Indians, and from Tampa bay was carried by a fishing vessel 
to Havana, where he was recovered by the memorialist, and has 
been ever since in his possession. The memorialist further rep- 
resents, that he is unwilling to sell the said negro, who is desir- 
ous to return to this country, where his relations still live, 
and, therefore, prays that a law may be passed allowing him 
to bring home his said negro. 

A general affidavit of two witnesses to the truth of these 
facts, is annexed to the memorial ; and, also, that the said negro 
Henrv is the slave of the memorialist, and is at present in the 

city of Havana. 

Your committee, without waiting to inquire whether this 
affidavit be sufficient to establish the facts stated in the memor- 
ial, are of opinion, that, admitting them to be true, such a case 
is not presented as would justify Congress in relaxing the laws 
prohibiting the slave trade. Such a measure, if justifiable in any 
case, ought never to be adopted, unless upon weighty and urgent 
reasons. In this case, the slave had been carried away from 
his master, whilst Florida was a Spanish province, and seven 
years before its cession to the United States. At any time, 
during this period, the memorialist might have brought 
his slave from Havana to Pensacola, if he had thought proper. 
But now, for the first time, eight years after Florida has be- 
come a territory of the United States, and fifteen years after 
his slave was carried away, the petitioner applies for permission 
to import him from Havana to Pensacola. If this were allowed, 
it would establish a precedent, under the authority of which 



' House Reports, No. 51. 21 Cong, i Sess. 



428 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1830 

many frauds might be committed, and the laws prohibiting the 
'importation of slaves might be evaded. Your committee there- 
fore offer the following resolution : 

Resolved, That the prayer of the petitioner ought not to be granted. 



REPORT, JANUARY 13, 1830, 

ON THE LOBSTER FISHERY. i 

January 13, 1830, Mr. Buchanan submitted to the House 
the following report: 

The Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the 
memorial of sundry citizens of the United States, engaged in the 
lobster fisher}^ on the coast of Massachusetts, complaining that 
certain Acts of the Legislature of that State infringed their 
rights, under the Constitution and Laws of the United States, 
report : 

That, from the view which your Committee have taken 
of the subject, it is unnecessary they should make a particular 
statement of the case. The question presented by the memorial 
is one of great importance, involving the power of a sovereign 
State of this Union to regulate the fisheries along its own 
coasts, to the extent of one mile into the ocean ; but it is clearly 
a question for judicial decision, not for Legislative enactment. 
If any citizen of the United States has been deprived of any 
right which belongs to him under the Constitution and Laws 
of the United States, the courts of justice are open to him, and 
have ample power to afford him redress. Your Committee, 
therefore, believe, that, upon such a subject, it would be an 
improper interference with the Judicial department of the Gov- 
ernment, for this House even to express an opinion ; much less 
to enact a law such as the memorialists request, in effect declar- 
ing that the Acts of the Legislature of Massachusetts are in vio- 
lation of the Constitution and Laws of the United States, and 
are therefore void. Your Committee, therefore, report the 
following resolution : 

Resolved, That it is inexpedient to grant the prayer of the petitioners. 



* House Reports, No. 79, 21 Cong, i Sess. 



1830] SPEECH ON THE JUDICIARY 429 

SPEECH, JANUARY 14, 1830, 

ON THE JUDICIARY.' 

The bill establishing Circuit Courts and abridging the juris- 
diction of the District Courts in the districts of Indiana, Illinois. 
Missouri, Mississippi, the eastern district of Louisiana, and the 
southern district of Alabama, being under consideration, 
Mr. Buchanan rose, and said: 

Mr. Chairman: It becomes my duty to present to this 
committee the reasons which induced the Committee on the 
Judiciary to report the bill to the House which has just been 
read. In rising to discharge this duty, I feel conscious that the 
subject is in its nature dry and uninteresting; but its importance 
demands the attention of every member of this committee. In 
vain may we pass the most wise and salutary laws, unless we 
provide an efficient judiciary to carry their blessings and their 
l3enefits home to the people. Without such a judiciary, they 
remain a dead letter upon our statute book. 

This bill proposes no new theory — no untried experiment. 
It pursues the course which has been sanctioned by long experi- 
ence. The Committee on the Judiciary did not seek to be wiser 
than those who have gone before us. This bill, therefore, pro- 
vides nothing new for the old States of the Union. It merely 
extends to the new Western States that judicial system which 
has been found to be fully adequate to administer justice to all 
the States east of the Alleghany. 

Before I proceed to illustrate the necessity of this measure, 
it is perhaps proper that I should briefly present to the commit- 
tee some of the prominent points of the judicial history of the 
United States. Our present system was called into existence 
by the judicial act of September, 1789; and it demonstrates the 
wisdom and sagacity of the Congress of that day, that they 
should, at the very first attempt, have adopted a system, which, 
with but few alterations, has stood the test of an experience (^f 
forty years. Under that act, the United States was divided 
into thirteen districts, for each of which a district judge was 
appointed, who was required to reside therein, and to hold a 
court to be called a district court. These district courts were 
entirelv independent of each other. Eleven of these tliirteen 



^Register of Debates, 21 Cong, i Sess. 1829-1830, VI., part i. pp. 530- 
537- 



430 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1830 

districts, consisting of the eleven States which were then mem- 
bers of the Union, were divided into three circuits. These 
were called the eastern, the middle, and the southern circuits. 
The eastern circuit was composed of the States of New Hamp- 
shire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New York; the middle, 
of the States of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Marv- 
land, and Virginia; and the southern, of the States of South 
Carolina and Georgia. The remaining districts of Maine and 
Kentucky, not then members of the Union, were not embraced 
in any circuit; but their district courts were invested with the 
powers of a circuit court. 

Under this act, the Supreme Court of the United States 
consisted of a chief justice and five associate justices. 

In each district of these three circuits, a circuit court was 
directed to be held twice in each year, to be composed of anv 
two justices of the Supreme Court, and the judge of the district. 
In June, 1790, the States of Rhode Island and North Caro- 
lina, and in March, 1791, that of Vermont, came into the Union. 
The districts of Rhode Island and Vermont were attached to the 
eastern, and that of North Carolina to the southern circuit. 

The committee will observe, that the act of 1789 did not 
assign the justices of the Supreme Court to particular circuits, 
but intended that they should alternate in holding their circuit 
courts. It was soon found to be impracticable for them to per- 
form the circuit duties required by this act. Under its opera- 
tion, the six justices of the Supreme Court, besides the perform- 
ance of their duties in bank, were required, in pairs, to hold 
circuit courts twice in each year, throughout the three circuits 
which embraced all the States of the Union. In 1792, they 
addressed the President of the United States upon the subject, 
who laid their communication before Congress. This produced 
the act of March, 1793, which declared that any one of the jus- 
tices of the Supreme Court, with the judge of the district, should 
compose the circuit court. This act, by dividing their duties, 
diminished their circuit labors one half, and enabled them, with- 
out difficulty, to attend all the circuit courts. 

Thus the Judiciary of the United States continued to be 
organized until the passage of the famous act of February 1801. 
This act produced great excitement throughout the country at 
the time of its passage, and met with strong public disappro- 
bation. It withdrew the justices of the Supreme Court from the 
performance of circuit duties, and made them exclusively an 



1830] SPEECH ON THE JUDICIARY 431 

appellate tribunal. Under its provisions, the United States were 
divided into six circuits, and three judges were appointed for 
each of the first five of these circuits. For the sixth circuit, 
which consisted of the districts of East and West Tennessee, 
Kentucky, and Ohio, only one circuit judge was appointed; who, 
together with the district judges of Tennessee and Kentucky, 
composed the court for that circuit. The district courts 
throughout this circuit were abolished, and their duties were 
transferred to the circuit court. Such was the provision which 
this act made for the performance of these circuit duties, which 
had been ably and satisfactorily discharged by the six justices 
of the Supreme Court previous to its passage. 

The act of 1801 had but a brief existence. It was swept 
from the statute book in little more than one year after it be- 
came a law, by the repealing act of March, 1802. All the 
judges created under it were thus legislated out of ofiice. Tliis 
has been called a high-handed proceeding, and it is one which 
ought never to be resorted to except in extreme cases ; but yet, in 
my opinion, experience has justified the measure, and has proved 
that such an extreme case then existed. But more of this 
hereafter. 

In April, 1802, the judicial system was re-organized, and 
placed upon the foundation on which it now rests. The old 
thirteen States, together with Vermont, were divided into six 
circuits, the first composed of the States of New Hampshire. 
Massachusetts, and Rhode Island; the second, of the States of 
Connecticut, New York, and Vermont; the third, of New Jer- 
sey and Pennsylvania; the fourth, of Maryland and Delaware; 
the fifth, of Virginia and North Carolina ; and the sixth, of South 
Carolina and Georgia. These circuits have ever since continued 
the same, except that Maine, since its admission into the Union, 
has been annexed to the first circuit. This act was the first 
which assigned to each justice of the Supreme Court a particular 
circuit. From the passage of the judicial act of 1789, until 
that of. April, 1802, the justices of the Supreme Court alternated 
and travelled over all the circuits. Since that time, each one 
of them has been confined to a single circuit. The act of 1802 
proceeded still further, and recognized the principle that the 
justices of the Supreme Court ought to reside within their re- 
spective circuits. At the date of its passage, four of the jus- 
tices resided within the circuits to which it assigned them. Upon 
the resignation of Mr. Justice Moore in 1804, whose residence 



432 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1830 

was in the fifth, but who was assigned to the sixth circuit, the 
I)resent Mr. Justice Johnston was appointed his successor. Ever 
since that time, all the justices of the Supreme Court have re- 
sided within their respective circuits, except the late Judge 
Washington. And of that lamented judge, permit me to say, 
that although he was the citizen of a State out of the limits of his 
circuit, yet his judicial character was held in as high estimation 
by the people of Pennsylvania, as will be that of any man who 
shall probably ever become his successor. 

Kentucky, which became a State of the Union in 1792, and 
Tennessee in 1796, were not embraced within the circuits created 
by the act of 1802. Each of them continued to have a district 
court, which, in addition to the ordinary powers of such a 
court, was invested with the jurisdiction of a circuit court. 
Ohio became a member of the Union in 1802; and, in February, 
1807, Congress established a seventh circuit, to consist of the 
States of Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio. Under this act, a 
sixth associate justice of the Supreme Court was appointed, to 
reside within the seventh circuit, and to hold the circuit courts. 
This circuit has always been too extensive, and the duties of the 
judge have ever been too laborious to be performed by any one 
man. 

After the passage of the act of 1807. each of the eighteen 
States which then composed the Federal Union, were provided 
with a circuit court. That act, in this respect, placed them all 
upon an equal footing. 

Since the year 1807, six new States have been added to 
the Union: Louisiana, in 1812; Indiana, in 1816; Mississippi, 
in 1817; Illinois, in 1818; Alabama, in 1819; and Missouri, in 
1821. 

The purpose of this bill is to extend the circuit court system 
to these new States ; and, in doing so, to make such an arrange- 
ment of the two new circuits which it proposes to establish, as 
will enable the courts to transact the business of the States of 
Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee. 

Before I proceed to discuss the merits of this bill, it is neces- 
sary, to a correct understanding of the subject, that I should 
present to the committee the great outlines of the jurisdiction 
of the circuit courts of the United States. I need scarcely re- 
peat, that they are composed of one of the justices of the 
Supreme Court and the judge of the district in which they are 
held. They do not possess original jurisdiction in any case. 



1830] SPEECH ON THE JUDICIARY 433 

unless the sum in controversy exceeds five hundred dollars. 
Above that amount they have unlimited original cognizance, 
concurrent with the courts of the several States, of all suits of 
a civil nature, at common law or in equity, in which the United 
States are plaintiffs, or in which an alien is one party, and the 
citizen of the State the other; or in which the controversy 
is between a citizen of the State where the suit is brought, and 
a citizen of another State. If an alien be sued in a State court 
by any State or the citizen of a State, or if the citizen of an- 
other State be sued in a State court by a citizen of the State in 
which the suit is brought, the defendant in either case may 
remove the cause into the circuit court of the United States. 
The jurisdiction of the circuit court also extends to controversies 
between citizens of the same State, claiming lands under grants 
of different States; and causes of this nature may be removed 
by either party from the courts of the States into the circuit 
court. Besides this extended original jurisdiction, the circuit 
courts are courts of appeal, in which the judgments and decrees 
of the district courts may be reviewed, in all civil cases in which 
the sum in controversy exceeds fifty dollars. When we consider 
that the district courts " have exclusive original cognizance of 
all civil causes of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction," this 
single branch of their power must be the fruitful source of many 
appeals to the circuit courts. 

The judgments or decrees of the circuit courts are final and 
conclusive in all cases in which the amount in controversy does 
not exceed two thousand dollars, unless when the two judges who 
compose them are divided in opinion upon some point which may 
have arisen during the trial. 

The circuit courts also possess exclusive original jurisdiction 
of all crimes of an aggravated nature committed against the 
United States; and they have concurrent jurisdiction with the 
district courts of all other offences. Their judgments in all crim- 
inal cases are conclusive, unless the judges are divided in opinion. 
If there has been such a division between them, either in a civil 
or criminal case, the point of disagreement may be certified to the 
next Supreme Court for a final decision. 

Having thus given a hasty sketch of the history of the 
Judiciary of the United States, and of the jurisdiction of the cir- 
cuit courts which this bill proposes to extend to the six new 
States of the Union, I shall now proceed to present the views 
of the Committee on the Judiciary in relation to this important 

28 



434 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1830 

subject. In doing this, I feel that, before I can expect the passage 
of the bill, I must satisfy the committee, first, that such a change 
or modification of the present judiciary system ought to be 
adopted, as will place the Western States on an equal footing 
with the other States of the Union; and, second, that the present 
bill contains the best provisions, which, under all the circum- 
stances, can be devised for accomplishing this purpose. 

And first, in regard to the States of Ohio, Kentucky, and 
Tennessee. It may be said that the existing law has already 
established circuit courts in these three States, and why then 
should they complain? In answer to this question, I ask gentle- 
men to look at a map of the United States, and examine the extent 
of this circuit. The distance which the judge is compelled to 
travel, by land, for the purpose of attending the different circuit 
courts, is, of itself, almost sufficient, in a few years, to destroy 
any common constitution. From Columbus, in Ohio, he proceeds 
to Frankfort, in Kentucky; from Frankfort to Nashville; and 
from Nashville, across the Cumberland mountain, to Knoxville. 
\\'hen we reflect that, in addition to his attendance of the courts 
in each of these States, twice in the year, he is obliged annually 
to attend the Supreme Court in Washington, we must all admit 
that his labors are very severe. 

This circuit is not only too extensive, but there is a great 
press of judicial business in each of the States of which it is 
composed. In addition to the ordinary sources of litigation for 
the circuit courts throughout the Union, particular causes have 
existed for its extraordinary accumulation in each of these States. 
It will be recollected that, under the Constitution and laws of 
the United States, the circuit courts may try land causes between 
citizens of the same State, provided they claim under grants from 
different States. In Tennessee, grants under that State and the 
State of North Carolina, for the same land, often come into con- 
flict in the circuit court. The interfering grants of Virginia and 
Kentucky are a fruitful source of business for the circuit court 
of Kentucky. These causes, from their very nature, are difficult 
and important, and must occupy much time and attention. With- 
in the Virginia military district of Ohio, there are also many 
disputed land titles. 

Another cause has contributed much to swell the business 
of the circuit court of Kentucky. The want of confidence of the 
citizens of other States in the judicial tribunals of that State, 
has greatly added to the number of suits in the circuit court. 



1830] SPEECH ON THE JUDICIARY 435 

Many plaintiffs, who could, with greater expedition, have recov- 
ered their demands in the courts of the State, were compelled, 
by the impolitic acts of the State Legislature, to resort to the 
courts of the United States. Whilst these laws were enforced 
by the State courts, they were disregarded by those of the Union. 
In making these remarks, I am confident no representative from 
that patriotic State will mistake my meaning. I rejoice that the 
difficulties are now at an end, and that the people of Kentucky 
have discovered the ruinous policy of interposing the arm of the 
law to shield a debtor from the just demands of his creditor. 
That gallant and chivalrous people, who possess a finer soil and 
a finer climate than any other State of the l^nion, will now, I 
trust, improve and enjoy the bounties which nature has bestowed 
upon them with a lavish hand. As their experience has been 
severe, I trust their reformation will be complete. Still, how- 
ever, many of the causes which originated in past years, are yet 
depending in the circuit court of that State. 

In 1826, when a similar bill was before this House, we had 
the most authentic information that there were nine hundred and 
fifty causes then pending in the circuit court of Kentucky, one 
hundred and sixty in the circuit court for the western district, 
and about the same number in that for the eastern district of Ten- 
nessee, and upwards of two hundred in Ohio. Upon that occa- 
sion, a memorial was presented from the bar of Nashville, signed 
by G. W. Campbell as chairman, and Felix Grundy, at present 
a Senator of the United States, as secretary. These gentlemen 
are both well known to this House, and to the country. That 
memorial declares that " the seventh circuit, consisting of Ken- 
tucky, Ohio, and Tennessee, is too large for the duties of it to be 
devolved on one man; and it was absolutely impossible for the 
judge assigned to this circuit to fulfil the letter of the law desig- 
nating his duties." Such has been the delay of justice in the State 
of Tennessee, " that some of the important causes now pending 
in their circuit courts are older than the professional career of 
almost every man at the bar." 

The number of causes dei>ending in the seventh circuit. T 
am informed, has been somewhat reduced since 1826; but still the 
evil is great, and demands a remedy. If it were possible for one 
man to transact the judicial business of that circuit, I should 
have as much confidence that it would be accomplished by the 
justice of the Supreme Court to which it is assigned, as by any 
other judge in the Union. His ability and his perseverance are 



436 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1830 

well known to the nation. The labor, however, both of body and 
mind, is too great for any individual. 

Has not the delay of justice in this circuit almost amounted 
to its denial ? Are the States which compose it placed upon the 
same footing, in this respect, with other States of the Union? 
Have they not a right to complain? Many evils follow in the 
train of tardy justice. It deranges the whole business of society. 
It tempts the dishonest and the needy to set up unjust and fraudu- 
lent defences against the payment of just debts, knowing that the 
day of trial is far distant. It thus ruins the honest creditor, by 
depriving him of the funds which he had a right to expect at or 
near the appointed time of payment; and it ultimately tends to 
destroy all confidence between man and man. 

A greater curse can scarcely be inflicted upon the people 
of any State, than to have their land titles unsettled. What, 
then, must be the condition of Tennessee, where there are many 
disputed land titles, when we are informed, by undoubted author- 
ity, " that some of the important causes now pending in their cir- 
cuit courts are older than the professional career of almost every 
man at the bar." Instead of being astonished at the complaints 
of the people of this circuit, I am astonished at their forbearance. 
A judiciary, able and willing to compel men to perform their 
contracts, and to decide their controversies, is one of the greatest 
political blessings which any people can enjoy ; and it is one which 
the people of this country have a right to expect from their Gov- 
ernment. The present bill proposes to accomplish this object, 
by creating a new circuit out of the States of Kentucky and Ten- 
nessee. This circuit will afford sufficient employment for one 
justice of the Supreme Court. 

Without insisting further upon the propriety, nay, the neces- 
sity, of organizing the circuit courts of Ohio, Kentucky, and Ten- 
nessee, in such a manner as to enable them to transact the business 
of the people, I shall now proceed to consider the situation of the 
six new States, Louisiana, Indiana, Mississippi, Illinois, Alabama, 
and Missouri. Their grievances are of a different character. 
They do not so much complain of the delay of justice, as that 
Congress has so long refused to extend to them the circuit court 
system, as it exists in all the other States. As they successively 
came into the Union, they were each provided with a district court 
and a district judge, possessing circuit court powers. The acts 
which introduced them into our political family declare that they 
shall " be admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the 



1830] SPEECH ON THE JUDICIARY 437 

original States, in all respects whatever." I do not mean to con- 
tend that by virtue of these acts we were bound immediately lo 
extend to them the circuit court system. Such has not been the 
practice of Congress, in regard to other States in a similar situa- 
tion. I contend, however, that these acts do impose an obligation 
upon us to place them '' on an equal footing with the original 
States," in regard to the judiciary, as soon as their wants require 
it, and the circumstances of the country permit it to be done. 
That time has, in my opinion, arrived. Louisiana has now been 
nearly eighteen years a member of the Union, and is one of our 
most commercial States; and yet, until this day, she has been 
without a circuit court. It is more than thirteen years since 
Indiana was admitted ; and even our youngest sister, Missouri, 
will soon have been nine years in the family. Why should not 
these six States be admitted to the same judicial privileges which 
all the others now enjoy? Even if there were no better reason, 
they have a right to demand it for the mere sake of uniformity. 
I admit this is an argument dictated by State pride; but is not 
that a noble feeling? Is it not a feeling which will ever charac- 
terize freemen ? Have they not a right to saiy to us, if the circuit 
court system be good for you, it will be good for us ? You have 
no right to exclusive privileges. If you are sovereign States, 
so are we. By the terms of our admission, we are perfectly your 
equals. We have long submitted to the want of this system, from 
deference to your judgment; but the day has now arrived when 
we demand it from you as our right. But there are several other 
good reasons why the system ought to be extended to these States. 
And, in the first place, the justices of the Supreme Court are 
selected from the very highest order of the profession. There is 
scarcely a lawyer in the United States who would not be proud 
of an elevation to that bench. A man ambitious of honest fame 
ought not to desire a more exalted theatre for the display of abil- 
ity and usefulness. Besides, the salary annexed to this office is 
sufficient to command the best talents of the country. I ask 
you, sir, is it not a serious grievance for those States to be de- 
prived of the services of such a man in their courts? I ask you 
whether it is equal justice, that whilst, in eighteen States of the 
Union, no man can be deprived of his life, his liberty, or his prop- 
erty, by the judgment of a circuit court, without the concurrence 
of two judges, and one of them a justice of the Supreme Court, 
in the remaining six the fate of the citizen is determined by the 
decision of a single district judge? Who are, generally speaking. 



438 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1830 

these district judges? In asking this question, I mean to treat 
them with no disrespect. They receive but small salaries, and 
their sphere of action is confined to their own particular districts. 
There is nothing either in the salary or in the station which would 
induce a distinguished lawyer, unless under peculiar circum- 
stances, to accept the appointment. And yet the judgment of this 
individual, in six States of the Union, is final and conclusive, in 
all cases of law, of equity, and of admiralty and maritime jurisdic- 
tion, wherein the amount of the controversy does not exceed two 
thousand dollars. Nay, the grievance is incomparably greater. 
His opinion in all criminal cases, no matter how aggravated may 
be their nature, is final and conclusive. A citizen of these States 
may be deprived of his life, or of his character, which ought to 
be dearer than life, by the sentence of a district judge; against 
which there is no redress, and from which there can be no appeal. 

There is another point of view in which the inequality and 
injustice of the present system, in the new States, is very striking. 
In order to produce a final decision, both the judges of a circuit 
court must concur. If they be divided in opinion, the point of 
difference is certified to the Supreme Court, for their decision ; 
and this, whether the amount in controversy be great or small. 
The same rule applies to criminal cases. In such a court, no 
man can be deprived of life, of liberty, or of property, by a 
criminal prosecution, without the clear opinion of the two judges 
that his conviction is sanctioned by the laws of the land. If the 
question be doubtful or important, or if it be one of the first im- 
pression, the judges, even when they do not really differ, often 
agree to divide, pro forma, so that the point may be solemnly 
argued and decided in the Supreme Court. Thus, the citizen of 
every State in which a circuit court exists, has a shield of pro- 
tection cast over him, of which he cannot be deprived, without 
the deliberate opinion of two judges ; whilst the district judge 
of the six new Western States must alone finally decide every 
criminal question, and every civil controversy in which the amount 
in dispute does not exceed two thousand dollars. 

In the eastern district of Louisiana, the causes of admiralty 
and maritime jurisdiction decided by the district court must be 
numerous and important. If a circuit court were established 
for that State, a party who considered himself aggrieved might 
appeal to it from the district court in ever}' case in which the 
amount in controversy exceeded fifty dollars. At present there 
is no appeal, unless the value of the controversy exceeds two 



1830] SPEECH ON THE JUDICIARY 439 

thousand dollars; and then it must be made directly to the 
Supreme Court, a tribunal so far remote from the city of New 
Orleans, as to deter suitors from availing themselves of this 
privilege. 

I shall not further exhaust the patience of the committee 
on this branch of the subject. I flatter myself that I have demon- 
strated the necessity for such an alteration of the existing laws, 
as will confer upon the people of Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee, 
and of the six new Western States, the same benefits from the 
judiciary, as those which the people of the other States now enjoy. 

The great question, then, which remains for discussion is, 
does the present bill present the best plan for accomplishing this 
purpose, which, under all circumstances, can be devised ? It is in- 
cumbent upon me to sustain the affirmative of this proposition. 
There have been but two plans proposed to the Committee on 
the Judiciary, and but two can be proposed, with the least hope 
of success. The one an extension of the present system, which 
the bill now before the committee contemplates, and the other 
a resort to the system which was adopted in the days of the elder 
Adams, of detaching the justices of the Supreme Court from the 
performance of circuit duties, and appointing circuit judges to 
take their places. After much reflection upon this subject, I do 
not think that the two systems can be compared, without pro- 
ducing a conviction in favor of that which h^s long been estab- 
lished. The system. of detaching the judges of the Supreme 
Court from the circuits has been already tried, and it has already 
met the decided hostility of the people of this country. No act 
passed during the stormy and turbulent administration of the 
elder Adams, which excited more general indignation among the 
people. The courts which it established were then, and have 
been ever since, branded with the name of the " midnight judi- 
ciary." I am far from being one of those who believe the people 
to be infallible. They are often deceived by the arts of dema- 
gogues : but this deception endures only for a season. They are 
always honest, and possess much sagacity. If, therefore, they get 
wrong, it is almost certain they will speedily return to correct 
opinions. They have long since done justice to other acts of 
that administration, which at the time they condemned ; but the 
feeling against the judiciary established under it remains the 
same.'' Indeed, many now condemn that system, who were for- 
merly its advocates. In 1826, when a bill, similar in its provi- 
sions to the bill now before the committee, was under discussion 



440 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1830 

in this House, a motion was made by a gentleman from Virginia 
[Mr. Mercer] to recommit it to the Committee on the Judiciary, 
with an instruction so to amend it, as to discharge the judges of 
the Supreme Court from attendance on the circuit courts, and to 
provide a uniform system for the administration of justice in the 
inferior courts of the United States. Although this motion was 
sustained with zeal and eloquence and ability by the mover, and 
by several other gentlemen, yet, when it came to the vote, it was 
placed in a lean minority, and, I believe, was negatived without 
a division. It is morally certain that such a bill could not now be 
carried. It would therefore have been vain and idle in the Com- 
mittee on the Judiciary to have reported such a bill. If the 
Western States should be doomed to wait for a redress of their 
grievances, until public opinion shall change upon this subject, 
it will, probably, be a long time before they will obtain relief. 

But, sir, there are most powerful reasons for believing that 
public opinion upon this subject is correct. What would be the 
natural consequences of detaching the judges of the Supreme 
Court from circuit duties ? It would bring them and their fami- 
lies from the circuits in which they now reside; and this city 
would become their permanent residence. They would naturally 
come here ; because here, and no where else, would they then have 
official business to transact. What would be the probable effect 
of such a change of residence? The tendency of every thing 
within the ten miles square is towards the Executive of the Union. 
He is here the centre of attraction. No matter what political 
revolutions may take place, no matter who may be up or who may 
be down, the proposition is equally true. Human nature is not 
changed under a republican Government. We find that citizens 
of a republic are worshippers of power, as well as the subjects 
of a monarchy. Would you think it wise to bring the justices of 
the Supreme Court from their residence in the States, where they 
breathe the pure air of the country, and assemble them here 
within the very vortex of Executive influence? Instead of being 
independent judges, scattered over the surface of the Union, their 
feelings identified with the States of which they are citizens, is 
there no danger, that, in the lapse of time, you would convert them 
into minions of the Executive ? I am far, very far, from suppos- 
ing that any man, who either is or who will be a justice of the 
Supreme Court, could be actually corrupted; but if you place 
them in a situation where they or their relatives would naturally 
become candidates for Executive patronage, you place them. 



1830] SPEECH ON THE JUDICIARY 441 

in some degree, under the control of Executive influence. If 
there should now exist any just cause for the complaints against 
the Supreme Court, that in their decisions they are partial to 
federal rather than to State authority, (and I do not say that there 
is,) that which at present may be but an imaginary fear might 
soon become a substantial reality. 1 would place them beyond 
the reach of temptation, I would suffer them to remain, as they 
are at present, citizens of their respective States, visiting this city 
annually to discharge their high duties, as members of the 
Supreme Court. This single view of the subject, if there were 
no other, ought in my judgment to be conclusive. 

Let us now suppose, for the sake of the argument, that the 
withdrawal of the justices of the Supreme Court from their 
circuit duties, and their residence in this city, would produce 
no such effects, as I apprehend, upon the judges themselves; 
what would be the probable effect upon public opinion? It has 
been said, and wisely said, that the first object of every judicial 
tribunal ought to be to do justice; the second, to satisfy the 
people that justice has been done. It is of the utmost importance 
in this country that the judges of the Supreme Court should 
possess the confidence of the public. This they now do in an 
eminent degree. How have they acquired it? By travelling 
over their circuits, and personally showing themselves to the 
people of the country, in the able and honest discharge of their 
high duties, and by their extensive intercourse with the members 
of the profession on the circuits in each State, who after all 
are the best judges of judicial merit, and whose opinions upon 
this subject have a powerful influence upon the community. Ele- 
vated above the storms of faction and of party which have some- 
times lowered over us, like the sun, they have pursued their steady 
course, unawed by threats, unseduced by flattery. They have 
thus acquired that public confidence, which never fails to follow 
the performance of great and good actions, when brought home 
to the personal observation of the people. 

Would they continue to enjoy this extensive public confi- 
dence, should they no longer be seen by the people of the States, 
in the discharge of their high and important duties, but be con- 
fined, in the exercise of them, to the gloomy and vaulted apart- 
ment which they now occupy in this capitol? Would they not 
be considered as a distant and dangerous tribunal? Would the 
people, when excited by strong feeling, patiently submit to have 
the most solemn acts of their State Legislatures swept from the 



442 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1830 

statute book, by the decision of judges whom they never saw, 
and whom they had been taught to consider with jealousy and 
suspicion? At present, even in those States where their decis- ^ 

ions have been most violently opposed, the highest respect has 
been felt for the judges by whom they were pronounced; be- 
cause the people have had an opportunity of personally knowing 
that they were both great and good men. Look at the illustrious 
individual who is now the Chief Justice of the United States. 
His decisions upon constitutional questions have ever been hostile 
to the opinions of a vast majority of the people of his own State; 
and yet with what respect and veneration has he been viewed by 
Virginia? Is there a Virginian, whose heart does not beat with 
honest pride when the just fame of the Chief Justice is the subject 
of conversation? They consider him, as he truly is, one of the 
greatest and best men which this country has ever produced. 
Think ye that such would have been the case, had he been con- 
fined to the city of Washington, and never known to the people, 
except in pronouncing judgments in this capitol, annulling their 
State laws, and calculated to humble their State pride? Whilst 
I continue to be a member of this House, I shall never incur the 
odium of giving a vote for any change in the judiciary system, 
the effect of which would, in my opinion, diminish the respect 
in which the Supreme Court is now held by the people of this 
country. 

The judges whom you would appoint to perform the circuit 
duties, if able and honest men, would soon take the place which 
the judges of the Supreme Court now occupy in the affections 
of the people; and the reversal of their judgments, when they 
happened to be in accordance with strong public feeling, would 
naturally increase the mass of discontent against the Supreme 
Court. 

There are other reasons, equally powerful, against the with- 
drawal of the judges from the circuits. What effect would such 
a measure probably produce upon the ability of the judges them- 
selves to perform their duties? Would it not be very unfor- 
tunate ? 

No judges upon earth ever had such various and important 
duties to perform, as the justices of the Supreme Court. In Eng- 
land, whence we have derived our laws, they have distinct courts 
of equity, courts of common law, courts of admiralty, and courts 
in which the civil law is administered. In each of these courts, 
they have distinct judges; and perfection in any of these branches 



1830] SPEECH ON THE JUDICIARY 443 

is certain to be rewarded by the honors of that country. The 
judges of our Supreme Court, both on their circuits and in bank, 
are called upon to adjudicate on all these codes. But this is not 
all. Our Union consists of twenty-four sovereign States, in all 
of which there are different laws and peculiar customs. The 
common and equity law have thus been changed and inflected 
into a hundred different shapes, and adapted to the various wants 
and opinions of the different members of our confederacy. The 
judicial act of 1789 declares "that the laws of the several 
States, except where the constitution, treaties, or statutes of the 
United States shall otherwise require or provide," shall be re- 
garded as rules of decision in the courts of the United States. 
The justices of the Supreme Court ought, therefore, to be 
acquainted with the ever-varying codes of the different States. 

There is still another branch of their jurisdiction, of a grand 
and imposing character, which places them far above the cele- 
brated Amphyctionic council. The Constitution of the United 
States has made them the arbiters between conflicting sovereigns. 
They decide whether the sovereign power of the States has been 
exercised in conformity with the constitution and laws of the 
United States; and, if this has not been done, they declare the 
laws of the State Legislatures to be void. Their decisions thus 
control the exercise of sovereign power. No tribunal ever ex- 
isted, possessing the same, or even similar authority. Now, sir, 
suppose you bring these judges to Washington, and employ them 
in bank but six weeks or two months in the year, is it not certain 
that they will gradually become less and less fit to decide upon 
these different codes, and that they will at length nearly Jose all 
recollection of the peculiar local laws of the different States? 
Every judicial duty which each of them would then be required 
to perform, would be to prepare and deliver a few opinions 
annually in bank. 

The judgment, like every other faculty of the mind, requires 
exercise to preserve its vigor. That judge who decides the most 
causes, is likely to decide them the best. He who is in the daily 
habit of applying general principles to the decision of cases, as 
they arise upon the circuits, is at the same time qualifying himself 
in the best manner for the duties of his station on the bench 
of the Supreme Court. 

Is it probable that the long literary leisure of the judges in 
this city, during ten months of the year, would be devoted to 
searching the two hundred volumes of jarring decisions of State 



444 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1830 

courts, or in studying the acts of twenty-four State Legislatures ? 
The man must have a singular taste and a firm resolution, who, 
in his closet, could travel over this barren waste. And even if he 
should, what would be the consequence? The truth is, such 
knowledge cannot be obtained; and after it has been acquired, 
it cannot be preserved, except by constant practice. There are 
subjects which, when the memory has once grasped, it retains for 
ever. It has no such attachment for acts of Assembly, acts of 
Congress, and reports of adjudged cases, fixing their construction. 
This species of knowledge, under the present system, will always 
be possessed by the judges of the Supreme Court; because, in the 
performance of their circuit duties, they are placed in a situation 
in which it is daily expounded to them, and in which they are daily 
compelled to decide questions arising upon it. Change this sys- 
tem, make them exclusively judges of an appellate court, and you 
render it highly probable that their knowledge of the general 
principles of the laws of their country will become more and 
more faint, and that they will finally almost lose the recollection 
of the peculiar local systems of the different States. " Practice 
makes perfect," is a maxim applicable to every pursuit in life. 
It applies with peculiar force to that of a judge. I think I might 
appeal for the truth of this position to the long experience of the 
distinguished gentleman from New York, now by my side, [Mr. 
Spencer.] A man, by study, may become a profound lawyer in 
theory, but nothing except practice can make him an able judge. 
I call upon every member of the profession in this House to say 
whether he does not feel himself to be a better lawyer at the end 
of a long term, than at the beginning. It is the circuit employ- 
ment, imposed upon the judges of England and the United States, 
which has rendered them what they are. In my opinion, both the 
usefulness and the character of the Supreme Court depend much 
upon its continuance. 

I now approach what I know will be urged as the greatest 
objection to the passage of this bill — that it will extend the num- 
ber of the judges of the Supreme Court to nine. If the necessi- 
ties of the country required that their number should be increased 
to ten, I would feel no objection to such a measure. The time 
has not yet arrived, however, when, in my opinion, such a neces- 
sity exists. Gentlemen, in considering this subject, ought to take 
those extended views which belong to statesmen. When we 
reflect upon the vast extent of our country, and the various sys- 
tems of law under which the people of the different States are 



1830] SPEECH ON THE JUDICIARY 445 

governed, I cannot conceive that nine or even ten judges are too 
great a number to compose our appellate tribunal. That num- 
ber would afford a judicial representation upon the bench of each 
large portion of the Union. Not, sir, a representation of sectional 
feelings or of the party excitements of the day, but of that pecu- 
liar species of legal knowledge necessary to adjudicate wisely upon 
the laws of the different States. For example, I ask what judge 
now upon the bench possesses, or can possess, a practical knowl- 
edge of the laws of Louisiana ? Their system is so peculiar, that 
it is almost impossible for a man to decide correctly upon all cases 
arising under it, who has never been practically acquainted with 
the practice of their courts. Increase the number of judges to 
nine, and you will then have them scattered throughout all the 
various portions of the Union. The streams of legal knowledge 
peculiar to the different States will then flow to the bench of the 
Supreme Court as to a great reservoir, from whence they will be 
distributed throughout the Union. There will then always be 
sufficient local information upon the bench, if I may use the 
expression, to detect all the ingenious fallacies of the bar, and 
to enable them to decide correctly upon local questions. I admit, 
if the judges were confined to appellate duties alone, nine or ten 
would probably be too great a number. Then there might be 
dansfer that some of them would become mere non-entities, con- 
tenting themselves simply with voting aye or no in the majority 
or minority. There would then also be danger that the Execu- 
tive might select inefficient men for this high station, who were 
his personal favorites, expecting their incapacity to be shielded 
from public observation by the splendid talents of some of the 
other judges upon the bench. Under the present system we have 
no such danger to apprehend. Each judge must now feel his own 
personal responsibility. He is obliged to preside in the courts 
throughout his circuit, and to bring home the law and the justice 
of his countr}^ to his fellow-citizens in each of the districts of 
which it is composed. Much is expected from a judge placed in 
his exalted station ; and he must attain to the high standard of 
public opinion by which he is judged, or incur the reproach of 
holding an office to which he is not entitled. No man in any sta- 
tion in this country can place himself above public opinion. ^ 

Upon the subject of judicial appointments, public opinion 
has always been correct. No factious demagogue, no man. 
merely because he has sung hosannas to the powers that be, can 
arrive at the bench of the Supreme Court. The Executive him- 



446 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1830 

self will always be constrained by the force of public sentiment, 
whilst the present system continues, to select judges for that court 
from the ablest and best men of the circuit; and such has been 
the course which he has hitherto almost invariably pursued. 
W^ere he to pursue any other, he would inevitably incur popular 
odium. Under the existing system, there can be no danger in 
increasing the number of the judges to nine. But take them from 
their circuits, destroy their feeling of personal responsibility by 
removing them from the independent courts over which they 
now preside, and make them merely an appellate tribunal, and I 
admit there would be danger, not only of improper appointments, 
but that a portion of them, in the lapse of time, might become 
incompetent to discharge the duties of their station. 

But, Sir, have we no examples of appellate courts consist- 
ing of a greater number than either nine or ten judges, which 
have been approved by experience? The Senate of the State of 
New York has always been their court of appeals; and, notwith- 
standing they changed their constitution a few years ago, so 
much were the people attached to this court, that it remains un- 
changed. In England, the twelve judges, in fact, compose the 
court of appeals. Whenever the House of Lords sits in a judicial 
character, they are summoned to attend, and their opinions are 
decisive of almost every question. I do not pretend to speak 
accurately, but I doubt whether the House of Lords have de- 
cided two cases, in opposition to the opinion of the judges, for 
the last fifty years. In England there is also the court of ex- 
chequer chamber, consisting of the twelve judges, and sometimes 
of the lord chancellor also, into which such causes may be ad- 
journed from the three superior courts, as the judges find to 
be difficult of decision, before any judgment is given upon them 
in the court in which they originated. The court of exchequer 
chamber is also a court of appeals, in the strictest sense of the 
word, in many cases which I shall not take time to enumerate. 

I cannot avoid believing that the prejudice which exists in 
the minds of some gentlemen, against increasing the number of 
the judges of the Supreme Court to nine, arises from the circum- 
stance that the appellate courts of the different States generally 
consist of a fewer number. But is there not a striking difference 
between the cases ? It does not follow that because four or five 
may be a sufficient number in a single State where one uniform 
system of laws prevails, nine or ten would be too many on the 
bench of the Supreme Court, which administers the laws of 



1830] SPEECH ON THE JUDICIARY 447 

twenty-four States, and decides questions arising under all the 
codes in use in the civilized world. Indeed, if four or five judges 
be not too many for the court of appeals in a State, it is a strong 
argument that nine or ten are not too great a number for the 
court of appeals of the Union. Upon the whole, I ask, would it 
be wise in this committee, disregarding the voice of experience, 
to destroy a system which has worked well in practice for forty 
years, and resort to a dangerous and untried experiment, merely 
from a vague apprehension that nine judges will destroy the use- 
fulness and character of that court, which has been raised by seven 
to its present exalted elevation. 

It will, no doubt, be objected to this hill, as it has been upon 
a former occasion, that the present system cannot be permanent, 
and that, ere long, the judges of the Supreme Courts must, from 
necessity, be withdrawn from their circuits. To this objection 
there is a conclusive answer. We know that the system is now 
sufficient for the wants of the country, and let posterity provide 
for themselves. Let us not establish courts which are unneces- 
sary in the present day, because we believe that hereafter they 
may be required to do the business of the country. 

But, if it were necessary, I believe it might be demonstrated 
that ten justices of the Supreme Court will be sufficient to do all 
the judicial business of the country which is required of them 
under the present system, until the youngest member of this 
House shall be sleeping with his fathers. Six judges have done 
all the business of the States east of the Alleghany mountains, 
from the adoption of the Federal Constitution up till this day; 
and still their duties are not laborious. If it should be deemed 
proper by Congress, these fifteen Eastern States might be 
arranged into five circuits instead of six, upon the occurrence 
of the next vacancy in any of them, without the least incon- 
venience either to the judges or to the people ; and thus it would 
be rendered unnecessary to increase the bench of the Supreme 
Court beyond nine, even after the admission of Michigan and 
Arkansas into the Union. The business of the federal courts, 
except in a few States, will probably increase but little for a long 
time to come. One branch of it must, before many years, be 
entirely lopped away. I allude to the controversies between citi- 
zens of the same State claiming lands under grants from different 
States. This will greatly diminish their business both in Ten- 
nessee and Kentucky. Besides, the State tribunals will gener- 
ally be preferred by aliens and by citizens of other States for the 



448 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1830 

mere recovery of debts, on account of their superior expedition. 

I should here close my remarks, if it were not necessary to 
direct the attention of the committee for a few minutes to the 
details of the bill. And here permit me to express my regret that 
my friend from Kentucky [Mr. Wickliffe] has thought proper to 
propose an amendment to add three, instead of two, judges to 
the Supreme Court. Had a majority of the Committee on the 
Judiciary believed ten judges, instead of nine, to be necessary, 
I should have yielded my opinion, as I did upon a former occa- 
sion, and given the bill my support in the House. This I should 
have done, to prevent division among its friends, believing it to 
be a mere question of time : for ten will become necessary in a 
few years, unless the number of the Eastern circuits should be 
reduced to five. 

[Here Mr. Wickliffe asked if it were in order to refer to 
his amendment, as it was not yet before the committee.] 

Mr. Buchanan said, he would not further refer to it at pres- 
ent. The bill proposes to create one new circuit out of Missis- 
sippi, the eastern district of Louisiana, and the southern district 
of Alabama. Nature has united these three districts. They can- 
not be separated without violence. There is a communication by 
water, between Natchez, New Orleans, and Mobile, the places 
at which the circuit courts will be held for the whole distance, 
which is always safe and expeditious. No other arrangement 
could have been made, unless Alabama had been connected with 
Tennessee; and that would have been extremely inconvenient. 
I have a certificate from the Post Office Department in my posses- 
sion, stating the distance from Nashville to Mobile to be four hun- 
dred and thirty-nine miles. The road is not good, the streams 
are not bridged, and it passes through a new country, and part 
of the way through an Indian nation. In order to attend the 
circuit court at Mobile, the judge would be compelled to travel 
over this road, from a healthy into a sickly climate, twice in each 
year, a total distance of one thousand seven hundred and fifty- 
six miles; and this, when he could reach Mobile, either from 
Natchez or New Orleans, by water, in two or three days. 

The circuit court cannot be removed from Mobile, and placed 
nearer to Nashville. It is there that admiralty and maritime 
causes arise and must be decided in the district court, from which 
an appeal is allowed to the circuit court. It is at that commercial 
point the citizens of Alabama chiefly come into contact in their 
commercial transactions with the citizens of other States and with 



1830] SPEECH ON THE JUDICIARY 449 

foreigners ; and there the chief civil business of the circuit court 
must arise. But, above all, it is there, near the verge of the 
Gulf of jMexico, where offences against the United States com- 
mitted upon the high seas must be tried and punished. 

Kentucky and Tennessee, under this bill, compose the other 
new circuit; and however reluctant these States may be to go 
together, I do not perceive how they can be separated, without 
imposing more labor upon some one of the Western judges than 
he ought to be called upon to perform. 

In regard to the other Western circuit, consisting of Ohio, 
Indiana, Illinois, and Missouri, I admit that it will embrace 
a large extent of territory. I am sorry for it, but it cannot be 
avoided. We ought, however, to consider that, if the judge shall 
be compelled to travel much, a great part of it will be by water. 
He will have but little business to transact in any of the States 
of which it is composed, except Ohio. It is probable, too, that 
ere long public convenience will suggest the removal of the circuit 
courts of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois from the seats of government 
of those States to the Ohio river ; and I am at a loss to conceive 
any good reason why the circuit court of Missouri should not be 
held at St. Louis. 

After all, I regret that necessity has compelled the Com- 
mittee on the Judiciary to report a bill, which, if it should pass, 
will impose so much travel on the judge of the seventh circuit. 
No man would be more disposed to relieve that distinguished 
individual from unnecessary labor than myself. I feel confident 
he will never complain. The man who, by the exertion of great 
ability, incessant labor, and untiring perseverance, brought the 
Post Office Department from chaos into order, will never shrink 
from the performance of any duty required of him by his countr>'. 

Another remark, and I have done. This bill does not pro- 
vide a circuit court for the western district of Louisiana, and 
the northern district of Alabama. In this respect, these districts 
are placed upon the same footing with the northern district of 
New York, the western district of Pennsylvania, and the western 
district of Virginia. I possess no actual infomiation concerning 
the amount of business in the northern district of Alabama ; but 
from its position it cannot be great. I have the best information 
that there is but little business in the western district of Louisiana. 
At all events, neither Louisiana nor Alabama will complain, when 
they are placed upon the same footing with New York, Pennsyl- 
vania, and Virginia. 

29 



450 THE WORKS OF JAMES BUCHANAN [1830 

REMARKS, FEBRUARY 10, 1830, 

ON DIPLOMATIC EXPENSES.' 

Mr. Buchanan said, he had not expected that the House 
would have entered into a party debate upon this question, and 
he trusted it would not now seriously engage in such a discussion. 
The two gentlemen who had addressed the House upon different 
sides of the question, appeared to him to have taken but a narrow 
view of the subject. It was decidedly his opinion that, in our 
intercourse with foreign nations, we should pursue a liberal and 
wise, rather than a narrow and short-sighted policy. It was the 
interest and the duty of this country to cherish the good opinion 
of foreign nations; and in our intercourse with them, if we 
acted upon narrow principles, we might find that, in realizing 
a small gain, the country might sustain a heavy loss. We should 
view this subject as statesmen, and never hesitate to provide the 
means necessary to enable the Executive to sustain both the char- 
acter and the cause of this country, in intercourse with other na- 
tions. Mr. B. said he was, therefore, astonished to hear gentle- 
men comparing the relative cost of our foreign intercourse in 
different years, and under different administrations, as if there 
were no other question to be considered, but which administration 
had spent the least money. 

Sir, [said Mr. B.] I was one of those who condemned the 
last administration, not so much on account of the amount of its 
expenditures in our foreign intercourse, as because, in practice, 
it repealed the law of i8io. A practice had grown up within the 
last twenty years, which at least violated both the letter and the 
spirit of that act. One precedent in violation of law was estab- 
lished, which gave birth to many others. At last this act was 
so wholly disregarded by the last administration, that they suf- 
fered a minister, upon leaving a foreign country, to convert his 
secretary of legation into a charge des affaires, and as such paid 
a full salary and outfit, although he returned home a very short 
time after the minister. This was not only without law, but 
expressly against law. He had not the least right to such an 
allowance. It was not a question whether the contingent fund 
ought to have been resorted to for his payment ; but it was a case 
in which the President had no right, under the law, to allow 



'Register of Debates, 2i Cong, i Sess. 1829-1830, VI., part i, pp. 558- 
559- 



1830] DIPLOMATIC EXPENSES 451 

him one cent, out of any fund, beyond his salary as secretary of 
legation. Mr. B. was willing that those matters should now rest 
in oblivion, and he would never voluntarily call them forth to the 
light. He had opposed the practice of the last administration, 
not because they had paid just demands out of the contingent 
fund, but because they had made donations to individuals in 
express violation of the existing laws. 

Mr. B. said, the true reason why the appropriation necessary 
for our foreign intercourse was greater the present than it had 
been the past year, was, that several of our ministers had been 
recalled, and others had been appointed in their stead, whom it 
was necessary to provide with outfits. Would any gentleman 
question the right of the Executive to pursue this course? For 
this conduct he was answerable to no tribunal but that of the 
American people. The appointment of foreign ministers was 
peculiarly within the province of the Executive. The constitu- 
tion and laws of the United States had reposed in him this dis- 
cretion; and it must be an extreme case indeed in which the 
House of Representatives ought to withhold the necessary appro- 
priation. He presumed no gentleman in the House would say 
that such a case now existed. He had risen to say thus much; 
and he hoped to see the appropriation made without further 
discussion. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 





007 554 998 2 



: li 






-:('■''•:■.''■' :i -Ui 



■ ! : . ; 












. ; . : ; ; i , i ^ ; ; ■ 









- ■ . ' I ■' 



